It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
I just go backwards & forwards in my mind about these things.
On the ATS show on the weekend, I stated I had doubts about large-scale government "cover ups" occurring.
I look at this Westall incident & the many aspects & the complexity of this case…..& it appears an effective cover up HAS occurred here.
Originally posted by torsion
Any elaborate hoax could be augmented with fake/manipulated newspaper cuttings.
I noticed in both the newspaper reports that the Americanised spelling of "color" is used. Correct me if I'm wrong, Chadwickus, but don't the Australians use the English spelling - "colour"?
Commonwealth countries normally follow British usage. In Canada -or endings are not uncommon, particularly in Western Canada. In Australia, -or terminations enjoyed some use in the 19th century, and now are sporadically found in some regions, usually in local and regional newspapers, though -our is almost universal.
There are a few too many UFO cliches in the documentary and these make me somewhat suspicious. And the story of the missing girl is too big to mention in passing without any follow up. Further, if the news reel footage had disappeared, why not the newspaper reports also?
Are there any journals in print (not on-line jpgs) that covered the incident and predate Shane Ryan's involvement? Was it featured in Flying Saucer Review in the 60s, for example?
I really hope it's a genuine case but I sit upon the fence at the moment undecided which side to drop down to.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
Frankly speaking, if you've gone through all of the available information on this case and your biggest concern is the spelling of the word colour, then i submit that the case is genuine.
THE BALWYN PHOTO ENIGMA
A puzzling footnote exists on the Westall High school affair. A
colour Polaroid photo was taken of a UFO allegedly seen over the
Melbourne suburb of Balwyn, at 2.21 pm, on April 2nd, 1966, 4 days
before the school landing. The photo was taken by a local engineering
company business man who was also a member of the Victorian Flying
Saucer Research Society. He requested that his name not be used, so
he was referred to as "James Brown" in some accounts.
The weather was warm and clear. Suddenly the man's garden lit
up as if there had been a reflection from some huge mirror. Brown
looked up and saw a bright, shiny object coming towards him. He
estimated its diameter at being between 20 feet to 35 feet. The
object seemed to about 150 feet up in the air. It appeared to float
down towards the witness. The strange object resembled a big mushroom with the stalk pointing towards earth. It spun through a 180
degrees angle on its vertical axis, then the witnessed photographed
it. The object then turned slowly through another 180 degrees on its
horizontal axis bringing the stalk to face the business man. From
what seemed a virtual stationary position it shot off northwards at
great speed, seemingly accelerating to be hundreds of miles an hour
in seconds. The witness ran and got a carpenter who was working on
the house. They heard a boom similar like a sonic boom seconds later.
The VFSRS president knew the witness and interviewed him and the carpenter. The carpenter confirmed Brown's story, stating he had
Brown in sight when the photograph had been taken. The two had stood shoulder to shoulder as the Polaroid photo developed. Despite Brown's apparent inclination to keep the story quiet, the photo and story was released to the media. The incident received national press and
television coverage. Despite this, there was no public interest
apparent from official organisations.
VFSRS issued a report on the photo which indicated that the
polaroid photograph and an enlarged copy showed no evidence of a
multiple exposure, montage or any other form of tampering. The US
organisation, APRO, had their photo consultant examine the photo. Dr.
B.R. Frieden, Professor of Optical Sciences at the University of
Arizona, reported finding "a jagged line of discontinuity running
across the centre of the photo, through the cloud field, which
suggests that there are actually 2 separate photos joined together and
rephotographed to make the one." APRO therefore regarded the photo as a possible hoax. The photo also apparently "failed" the GSW (Ground Saucer Watch) computer enhancement technique. Although aware of these results, Brown still maintains the photo is a genuine one.