Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Do you remember Dolores Barrios, the woman from the planet Venus???

page: 1
65
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+35 more 
posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   
I did some research in the ATS, seeking threads about this subject and I didn't find them. Assuming that nobody has done any particular approaching of this classic case of UFO research, I posted this topic. I really hope none moderator close this, 'cos gave me a lot of work to do that...

This is a classic!! A notorious, well known case of modern UFO research. Indeed it had a large worldwide repercussion, 'cos was an event where supposedly has occurred a direct contact and interaction between extraterrestrial beings and a large group of humans. I'm talking about the so called "Dolores Barrios case".
The event I'm referring was an UFO meeting, a conference actually, that happened on August 7-8, 1954in the top of Mount Palomar, California, at an altitude over 6.000 feet, in front of the Skyline Lodge.
This congress was promoted by George Adamski, Truman Bethurum and Daniel Fry, supposed contactees and well known in the UFO community. More than a thousand persons attended it, from American journalists, FBI agents, saucer witnesses and just the curious.
During the event George Adamski was explaining that the Venusians were much alike human beings and that they had infiltrated our society, living in the big cities. He also presented an artistic painting depicting a Venusian humanoid, very similar to blond caucasian humans with standard height and body structure, but not with so pale skin as the Scandinavians.
At the end of the first day there was some commotion when the audience noticed the presence of two men and a woman with an exotic and very peculiar appearance. The rumor started that they were disguised Venusian humanoids. Those that Adamski had talked about a few hours before.
One of the men used glasses. The three were white-skinned and the woman had long blond hair. So far, no big deal. They could be just weird looking ordinary people. Then one of the attendees asked them, without much embarrassment:
"Are you or are you not Venusians?" The woman, smiling, calmly replied. "No". The following dialogue:

"- Why are you here?
- Because we are interested in this subject.
- Do you believe in flying saucers?
- Yes.
- Is it true that, as Mr. Adamski says, that they come from Venus?
- Yes. They are from Venus."


The Brazilian journalist, João Martins, from the extinct magazine, "O Cruzeiro" was also present. He has interviewed them and according to his statement, the woman said she was called Dolores Barrios and claimed she was a dresses designer. She also said the names of her friends were Donald Morand and Bill Jackmart, both supposed musicians. At last she said they lived in Manhattan Beach, California. For the rest of the conference the three became isolated from the audience and didn’t talk with the other attendees.
In the following day, at the end of the meeting, the strange visitors let themselves be photographed. Martins has surprised Dolores using a flash in his camera, what scared her, that immediately ran to the forest, followed by her friends. Few moments later, a flying saucer was seen rocketing upwards, but no one was able to capture a photo.
It seems the only photos of Dolores and his buddies, were taken by João Martins and definitely you can't find much about them in the internet. Actually, you can't find ANYTHING about them. There's no other imagery along the years, none information about their jobs, no personal references, nothing, nada, zimp, zero.



Above, "Dolores Barrios". This picture is the most common in the internet. This greeny version isn't the original taken by Martins. Most likely it's from further graphic manipulation.



Above, "David Morand", one of her buddies.



And above, "Phil Jackmart", the third guy.

Have you noticed that definitely there's something very odd and uncommon in their faces, something kinda distinct in their looks. Regardless the poor quality of the images, this oddness is still inherent. Lets dig it deep:



Above you can notice that her face conveys something inexplicable, a slight "strange in the crowd", expression..., but also very peculiar physic characteristics I'll expose ahead...



Just look at her standing pose... Does she looks like an ordinary woman?? Ok, lets play hard now:



Can you see what I pointed out in the pic above?





Look carefully what I pointed out in the two pics above.



Anyone can explain what the heck is that spiky thing near of the Jackmart's face??



What about that weird silhouette behind Morand?? Whatever it was, I assume it was camouflaged over there. Wasn't noticed by Martins, but it was caught by the camera.

That's all we have guys. You won't find an analysis like that, in other place. However you can download the raw images and read a review of this case, right here.

So, bring on your ideas!!!


[edit on 22-3-2010 by ucalien]




posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Certainly an interesting story, I just have one little issue. It may be a bit petty but I cannot get around it.

Over 1000 people at a UFO convention witnessed a UFO and no one had a camera ready?

More to that point, the thing triggering the UFO event was a camera so why did no one get a picture?

I am not calling this out or anything but I do have a hard time getting my head around scenarios like that.



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:21 PM
link   
She also appears to be waring fake eyelashes or very thick black eyeliner or something. What is pointed out as a shadow caused by the distance between lid and ball kind of turns inside out if you follow it from the end of her left eye on to the end of her right eye. That is what it looks like to me anyway.



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ucalien
 


Thanks so much for sharing. That was a fascinating read and something I had never heard of.

I think her 'large eyelashes' were probably just clumpy from mascara, the spikes under the man's face were shadows (look at the placement and it looks obvious), etc.

But her eyes do look way too large for her face and that ridge in her forehead is odd.

Anyways, I personally don't buy it but I love reading these kinds of tales.



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Sorry the "nose ridge" looks added in.Even though she is looking at the camera at an angle it looks pefectly straight and it does not even look like a ridge. It just looks like someone moved a section of the picture up a little bit. And the eyes thing just looks like bad lighting.



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ucalien
 


She looks like Mischa Barton.



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 




Over 1000 people at a UFO convention witnessed a UFO and no one had a camera ready? More to that point, the thing triggering the UFO event was a camera so why did no one get a picture?


I don't think in the '50s someone would expect to see an alien spaceship parked near a conference, even being an UFO conference. And even less to see alien humanoids PARTICIPATING of this conference, I mean, people EVER are surprised by UFO sightings and few people have the nervous reflex to take pictures. However these three people NEVER were seen again, nor in the USA and nor in any other part of the world.


[edit on 22-3-2010 by ucalien]



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I see nothing odd in her face or her standing position.

I have super long eyelashes. But false eyelashes were around back then and she is probably wearing heavy makeup and that mixed with lighting and the film - thats why her eyes look like that.

Back then it was very glamours to have the long eyelashes (created with makeup or false eyelashes) and heavy makeup - think about all those pinups


Your also looking at very old film - it is not HD where you see every single line and flaw in one's skin - exactly as you see it in person. Film distorts.

[edit on March 22nd 2010 by greeneyedleo]



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 




I think her 'large eyelashes' were probably just clumpy from mascara, the spikes under the man's face were shadows (look at the placement and it looks obvious), etc.


What do you mean about "mascara", some sort of women make up complement or something??? Do u mean those fake eyelashes, like hair plugs or something??? Hmmm, I don't know... I have big eyelashes myself... and I'm from Earth, at least I remember
But I doubt a woman with eyes that odd, would have a normal eyelash...
The thing I pointed near of the guy's face isn't a shadow cast. Seems something material, tridimensional. Unfortunately his t-shirt is black, so it bursted our bubbles....



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 




I see nothing odd in her face or her standing position.

I have super long eyelashes. But false eyelashes were around back then and she is probably wearing heavy makeup and that mixed with lighting and the film - thats why her eyes look like that.


I'm a man, but I have huge eyelashes too, regardless her eyelashes, assuming they are just different or a fake plug or something, can you explain her double and triple eye glands??? And please don't say these tiny balls in the corner of her eyes, are "make up", "lens artifact", or something. They are clearly part of her ocular structure...
About her standing pose, looks outta place to me, I mean, I'm a man that appreciate so much women and a good observer of female behavior. She definitely looks displaced.
But it's just me...

[edit on 22-3-2010 by ucalien]



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
Sorry the "nose ridge" looks added in.Even though she is looking at the camera at an angle it looks pefectly straight and it does not even look like a ridge. It just looks like someone moved a section of the picture up a little bit. And the eyes thing just looks like bad lighting.




I agree that it LOOKS added in. But this is a photograph from 1950. How do you propose this was digitally altered in such a fashion back then?

I don't know about the alleged objects... The leaves on the trees seem to resemble the pattern near Jackmart's chin / collar area, and the Sun is behind and above him. Could be a shadow of the leaves. Dolores' eyes do look odd but I've seen people with some very weird-looking eyes.

The ridge on her forehead is something I've NEVER seen before, and it is absolutely fascinating me. Thanks for bringing this subject back up! (edit to add here) Has anybody seen a cranial feature like this before? That just screams for further attention. Her face always seemed unnaturally wide to me... or at least that the proportions are off.

Just a side note - while the lower atmosphere and surface conditions of Venus are absolutely unlivable (850 degrees, clouds of sulfur dioxide and sulfuric acid, 92 times the atmospheric pressure of Earth at sea level, hotter than Mercury) - it has been hypothesized that small floating cities in the upper atmosphere would present a very reasonable living condition for future human colonies.

[edit on 22-3-2010 by Son of Will]



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   
In the 1950's I don't think we knew that Venus was literally hotter than hell, did we? I bake pizza at 350-400 degrees F and that almost burns the flesh off my hand if I try to remove the pizza without a mitt, so it's hard to imagine humanoids living at a temperature of 800-900 degrees F, especially when water boils at 212 F. So people believing made up stories about aliens from Venus back then was more understandable if they didn't know how hot it was.

But now that we know that almost nothing can survive on Venus...even our engineered spacecraft can't survive there very long, I can't imagine any rational person still wonders if there's any humanoid beings on or from Venus. Maybe some kind of simple life form like a single-celled extremophile
might survive floating in the upper atmosphere where it's cool enough for the water vapor to condense into liquid water? But nothing bipedal can live there I'm pretty sure.

The so-called "brow ridge" may be some kind of anomaly with the image and does not appear to be a part of the woman's face.

Regarding the eyelash, either fake or a lot of mascara or both, nothing alien about that. I see people that look a lot more odd than her and I don't think they are from Venus, she really doesn't look that odd to me.

[edit on 22-3-2010 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
A fascinating and very thought provoking thread but there is just one point you brought up that I wish to refer to, and that is the theorised ridge of bone running down the forehead. My youngest brother has such a ridge and I would go so far as to say his ridge is a little more defined than the one you have pointed out.

By the way I have seen the woman’s photograph before, many years ago but had not really looking into the back-story so I thank you for this thread, starred and flagged!

Now I will turn this thread and information contained within upside down and see where it leads me, thanks for posting it



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ucalien
 




What do you mean about "mascara", some sort of women make up complement or something???


I mean, as in that was the style at the time. The HUGE colored in eyebrows, big fake eyelashes or eyelashes gooped up with mascara, ungodly levels of eyeliner that took up the whole eyelid, etc. lol

That image is also high contrast which will make features appear 'fatter' than they are.

Don't get me wrong- her eyes are VERY unusual. But the eyelashes aren't what's odd, especially for the time period.

Not knocking your thread- I think it was an interesting read.


[edit on 3/22/2010 by AshleyD]



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Ok, this is pretty way out there - left field so to say, but does anybody see a similarity between this Dolores Barrios and this photo:

www.abidemiracles.com...

Picture the hair blond and eyes open. The bridge of the nose, spacing of eyes (and maybe eye shape too), and lips seem to have some weird similarities.

Maybe I've been sitting in front of this PC too long? (You know ... getting the snake / crook eye as Kramer on Seinfeld)



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ucalien
 





Above, "David Morand", one of her buddies.


Poor David Morand. Light years ahead of us technologically. Able to adapt to the most unpleasant atmospher of Venus. But the advanced race hasn't conquered 20/20 vision.

I find the story interesting but not likely.

Wish we had more to go on other than 4 eyes and his friends.

Becker



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ucalien
 



It's a shame you started going on about eyes/eyelashes and weird objects in the pictures/background.

Makes me dubious of the whole thing.

There's clearly nothing "weird" in any of the pics... apart from the appearance of the people... they do have a common weird look and she looks weird for sure.

I think she's pretty hot actually...



Doesn't seem to be a lot of info about it on the net?



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Son of Will
 




Dolores' eyes do look odd but I've seen people with some very weird-looking eyes.


Dude, have you seen people with double/triple lacrimal glands, before??? I say people commenting here are saying I'm seeing things, but I'm 99% sure that tiny balls in the corner of her eyes, definitely are part of her optical structure, I bet they are glands.




Just a side note - while the lower atmosphere and surface conditions of Venus are absolutely unlivable (850 degrees, clouds of sulfur dioxide and sulfuric acid, 92 times the atmospheric pressure of Earth at sea level, hotter than Mercury) - it has been hypothesized that small floating cities in the upper atmosphere would present a very reasonable living condition for future human colonies.


This information you provided, about floating cities (doomed, right??) above Venus atmosphere, just baffles me out. It's just amazing, I mean, I thought about underground cities in Venus, not in floating cities! Where did you get this information?? Can you provide a link, exposing this subject??



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Son of Will
 




I agree that it LOOKS added in. But this is a photograph from 1950. How do you propose this was digitally altered in such a fashion back then?


You are looking at a digital version of the photo, not the original. i could add anything to any picture i wanted reguardless of age.



posted on Mar, 22 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Looks more like Uma Thurman's real mother!
Same nose same eyes and just as pretty!

Zindo





new topics

top topics



 
65
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join