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.


Travis Walton (Moment Of Truth) Proof, Hes A Liar!!

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:27 PM

Originally posted by Turiddu
You guys are spending too much time on the polygraphs, look at the other parts of the story. There are many other things that don't add up.

"Ground Saucer Watch" Memo on the Walton Incident
Conclusions (undated: probably December, 1975)

"Ground Saucer Watch," a pro-UFO organization, was the very first UFO organization on the scene of the Walton "abduction". In cooperation with Dr. J. Allen Hynek of CUFOS, Dr. Lester Stewart of GSW began to interview the Walton family while Travis was still "missing." They immediately smelled a hoax. These are their conclusions, without any changes - RS.

1. Walton never boarded the UFO. This fact is supported by the six witnesses and the polygraph test results. [3]

2. The entire Walton family has had a continual UFO history. The Walton boys have reported observing 10 to 15 separate UFO sightings (very high).

3. When Duane was questioned about his brother's disappearance, he stated that "Travis will be found, that UFO's are friendly." GSW countered, "How do you know Travis will be found?" Duane said "I have a feeling, a strong feeling." GSW asked "If the UFO 'captors' are going to return Travis, will you have a camera to record this great occurrence?" Duane, "No, if I have a camera 'they' will not return."

4. The Walton's mother showed no outward emotion over the 'loss' of Travis. She said that UFO's will not harm her son, he will be returned and that UFO's have been seen by her family many times.

5. The Walton's refused any outside scientific help or anyone who logically doubted the abduction portion of the story.

6. The media and GSW was fair to the witnesses. However, when the story started to 'fall apart' the Waltons would only talk to people who did not doubt the abduction story.

7. APRO became involved and criticized both GSW and Dr. Hynek for taking a negative position on the encounter.

8. The Waltons 'sold' their story to the National Enquirer and the story was completely twisted from the truth.

-----RS NOTES----

1. In other words, James Harder was using hypnosis to lead Travis Walton into "remembering" a proper UFO abduction story. UFOlogists cite the apparent consistencies of these stories as proof that they are supposedly authentic! But here we glimpse the real reason behind the apparent similarities: Harder rehearsed Walton's story over and over again until the latter was ready to face the press and tell a convincing story.

2. The very existence of this polygraph session with John J. McCarthy was kept secret by the National Enquirer and by APRO, with McCarthy ordered never to speak about it. The cover-up was revealed by Philip J. Klass in June, 1976. The details of the Walton hoax, and its associated cover-up, can be found in chapters 18-23 of Klass' book UFOs The Public Deceived (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1983).

3. Apparently GSW thought that in order to have a "genuine" UFO abduction, the UFO would have to land, and pick up its passenger.

edit on 20-9-2010 by Turiddu because: Changed italics - Per SHIN-BET/SHABAK regulations 12-01

Where are the evidence to those claims? And how reliable is Robert Sheaffer?

Here are two links, one claiming a hoax, and another link to his story.

Supposed Hoax Explanation

Travis Walton Abduction UFO Casebook

Here is another awesome link with FOIA stuff:


Debunkers’ Concerns:

1. The young man, Travis Walton, had a expunged record (burglary) so Mr. No Klass mentioned the record in his book, but didn’t mention how he came by this fact. Of course, this should have been a plus to Walton’s character, since he did get the conviction wiped off the record by doing what was right, but Klass didn’t represent it that way in the book. Travis had revealed his youthful offence in the primary examination after the UFO incident.

2. Mr. Klass had valid data which indicated that certain information had been withheld intentionally by APRO (Aerial Phenomena Research Organization) which was based in Tucson, Arizona. (Travis Watson failed his first polygraph test administered by an expert with 10 years experience, hired by APRO).

3. Travis took a second Polygraph test (two months later) and he passed, but Klass pointed out the examiners only had 2 years experience and was instructed what questions to ask.

4. The motive given for the hoax by the debunkers and others is: Mike Rogers, owner of the business for nine years,” had grossly underestimated the magnitude of the job and could not complete it on time” This would result in payment held up till spring unless he could prove an act of God –which this was.

The Walton family are described as a “UFO Freak family” because they believed that UFOs were space ships from other worlds. Some members of the family had claimed to have witnessed UFO craft. "I'm not surprised,” said one member, “I don’t think he (Travis) is on this earth. Duane, his brother, “the psychopath” said "Travis will be found; the UFO's are friendly” when he was questioned by the authorities right after the disappearance. Travis Walton admitted that his father, who deserted them, believed in UFOs. “Klass noted: “no concern expressed by family” therefore they knew his disappearance was a lie and family was fantasy prone. And, yada, yada, yada…

By the way, just a note, under the freedom of information act documents were de-classified to indicate activity by UFOs in and around the areas at that time:

“DOD, USAF, and CIA document reveal that during October, November, and December of 1975, reliable military personnel repeatedly sighted unconventional aerial objects in the vicinity of nuclear-weapons storage areas, aircraft alert areas and nuclear-missile control facilities at Loring Air Force Base, Maine; Wurtsmith AFB Michigan; Malstrom AFB, Montana; Minot AFB, North Dakota…”

Link to Part 2 of the blog

So what about APRO?

From Wiki :

APRO's credibility took a major blow in the 1970s. Travis Walton claimed to have been abducted by a UFO in Arizona. He was missing for several days, and returned amid a widespread police search and publicity. APRO, in conjunction with the National Enquirer arranged for a polygraph, which suggested Walton was lying about his claims. APRO, Walton and the Enquirer decided to suppress the polygraph results—the examiner was biased, they said, and unprofessional. Walton passed another polygraph, which was publicised. A few months later, Philip Klass—long skeptical of Walton's claims—uncovered the initial polygraph results. UFO researcher Jerome Clark suggests that even if the charges of bias were accurate, the way APRO suppressed the polygraph was "indefensible".

Here is something else I found:

Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO)
An amateur group, founded in 1952 by Jim and Coral Lorenzen, to study the phenomenon of unidentified flying objects. Its great ufology rival, a few years later, was the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena.


National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) An amateur UFO club, formed in 1956 in Washington, DC. In January 1957, it came under the directorship of retired major and flying saucer enthusiast, Donald Keyhoe. NICAP achieved an unwarranted measure of prestige and credibility through its governing board of retired admirals, generals and academics, enticed by Keyhoe to posts which were little more than sinecures. In reality, NICAP acted primarily as a vehicle for Keyhoe to promote the extraterrestrial hypothesis and press his claim that the U.S. Air Force and CIA were concealing information on alien spacecraft and their occupants.


posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 02:56 PM

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc

As we learned from this video, not only has he been lying, but was always obsessed with ufos and non-sense!

An answer to that question with the results being "The answer to that question is TRUE" would more than just a threat to the National Security of the United States of America, but also a threat to the International Security and sovereignty to more than a hundred nations on this planet.

your claims he was lying are moot because a response of "The answer to that question is TRUE" would have resulted in a threat to Global Securities as well as international institutions, and would have been detrimental to the all systems of government.

Furthermore, it is also a catch 22. If it was proven that polygraph tests were unreliable, even for circumstantial evidence, every inmate and convict that is currently incarcerated due to polygraphical support in their trials would have to be released and compensated financially at the expense of the tax payers and/or governments.

Also, Mr_skepticc, I whole heartedly doubt you are totally knowledgable enough about intracellular communications and the biological obligations of the subconscious Honorarium and it's subsistence. It may be possible that a system that has endured being asked the same identical inquiry tens of thousands of times over decades would probably induce a false reading for the same question as an intrapersonal self sustaining biological obligation.

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc

As we learned from this video, not only has he been lying, but was always obsessed with ufos and non-sense!

I find this statement to be an inane proclamation that dismisses out of hand many pertinent variables as well as just purely pertinacious.

Your screen name is a deception. You are not skeptical at all, but rather a debunker with a clear cut aim.

Here is a simple and fair analogy of debunkers, in my professional opinion:

There is a jigsaw puzzle with only two pieces to it.
Each piece has four sides.
15 out of 16 times those two pieces do not fit together, so you think they don't belong to the same puzzle.
But once out of 16 times those two sides line up and fit together.

If you are a staunch supporter of the debunking network, you are only right 15 out of 16 times, allegedly.
1 out of 16 times those pieces fit together.

Here is what a Debunker is to me:
Reasonable Doubt = Debunked

Skeptics and Debunkers alike are the reason certain truisms are not publicly known. period.
Ask yourself, are you part of the sollution, or part of the problem?

I was spent more than a decade stationed at Nellis AFB.
Any questions about where I stand on this issue?

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc

As we learned from this video, not only has he been lying, but was always obsessed with ufos and non-sense!

Who is "we" and why do you speak for them?
Who has been lying?
Who was always obsessed with ufos?
Who was always obsessed with non-sense?
Why is there an exclamation point at the end of that sentence?

Just because you are right 15 out of 16 times does not mean you are right. The pieces may fit together!

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc

As we learned from this video, not only has he been lying, but was always obsessed with ufos and non-sense!

Funny, I never heard the host ask the questions "Have you always believed in non-sense?" or "Have you always been obsessed with ufos?"

where did we learn either of those things?


these are some of my thoughts about this subject,

edit on 21-9-2010 by Esoteric Teacher because: remove 2 sentences

posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 06:23 PM
This has always been the final word on Travis Walton for me:

posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 02:40 AM

Originally posted by wasco2
This has always been the final word on Travis Walton for me:

For me that is nothing else than what the bull in your avatar is dropping.

edit on 22/9/10 by spacevisitor because: Made a correction

posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 02:47 AM
Mr skeptic shows all of the thought power of a baked potato with this pearler.

posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 12:02 PM

Originally posted by spacevisitor

For me that is nothing else than what the bull in your avatar is dropping.

edit on 22/9/10 by spacevisitor because: Made a correction

Well then, I got a bridge in New York you might be interested in buying.

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 08:12 AM

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc
What hillarious is the fact that if he passed the test, and we the skeptics said that polygraph test are not 100% and cant hold up in a court of law, All of you believers would be saying he passed, he passed the test.

Now, this is my opinion. In mr skeptic, here we have is someone who loves de-bunking. This is what he loves to do. He does not care about evidence, in fact, he most prob hopes that no evidence will come about, because that means he will have to stop what he loves, and thats de-bunking. This thread just does not make sense. The polygraph test is only right or wrong when it comes to his de-bunking beliefs.

Also, they never seem to stay active in their own thread, or any other thread because their lack of knowledge on the subject never lets them do this.

Just like we have hardcore believers, we also have these type of de-bunkers, and in my opinion, even though they think they are different, they are the same to me, just the other side of the coin

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 11:44 AM
Prior to jumping to conclusions, I suggest that everyone involved with the TV show be given a Lie Detector test to determine whether the "False" result was truly Walton's lie, or whether the show purposely went out of their way in an attempt to discredit Walton, knowing that he told the "Truth". We all know that game shows have never lied.

+20 more 
posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 12:33 PM
Travis Walton here. Thanks to all who see through this show's deception. The Moment of Truth uses a completely discredited polygraph method. Michael Martin, a court certified polygraph expert, created a site THE TRUTH ABOUT THE MOMENT OF TRUTH ( years before my show when the series first aired, saying, "...the polygraph aspect of the show has no validity whatsoever." "FOX TV has intentionally blocked us from publishing this information on their internet forum..." "This test format will NOT determine truth or deception...In other words, they could simply flip a coin and achieve similar accuracy levels."

The MOT used deceptive editing to mislead viewers. Notice the identical "reaction shot" from my family is used more than once. These shots are also out of their actual context. When the "not true" verdict was heard the audience began booing. Host Mark Walberg turned to the crowd and asked, "How many still believe he's telling the truth?" and the audience erupted into cheering loud and long. He then asked how many think he lied? and there were a few scattered calls from the back. THEY CUT THIS OUT, as well as other positive things. Two years ago I emailed one MOT producer about that saying, ".. they could edit that out, but that would be deceptive, wouldn't it?" Also they taped a fake opening sequence using an actor instead of the examiner, with my arm with sensors attached resting comfortably on a table, as per proper procedure. Later their actual "test" required me to hold my arm absolutely still balancing on only a narrow one inch wide steel chair arm for the entire 50+ questions, an excruciatingly long time. Their test subjects would naturally register random reactions to this stress. Modern accepted procedure sets a maximum of three or four questions. Many other violations of correct procedure.

Their test, like the McCarthy "failed" test, used a method rejected decades ago and found by the U.S. GAO (Government Accounting Office) to yield up to 80% false positives -- truthful persons judged as lying. This method is actually so illegal in some states that its use could result in a revoked license to practice. MOT further degraded this method to doing only one run through the questions! Three or four runs are required in accepted methods for comparison to spot random fluctuations unrelated to deception. The American Polygraph Association's STANDARDS AND PRINCIPLES OF PRACTICE specifically prohibits single chart tests. MOT's man committed most of the list of 13 "activities of UNETHICAL EXAMINERS" on the American Association of Police Polygraph Examiners website.

I asked polygraph experts at Backster School of Lie Detection for an opinion. Techniques in wide use today are named after world renowned polygraph expert Cleve Backster, who has twice testified before the U.S. Congress and has conducted hundreds of training courses and advanced seminars to law enforcement up to the federal level:U.S. Army Counterintelligence Corps, CIA, Fort Gordon, DOD, Canadian Police and FBI. Answer: "...Moment of Truth uses a technique in polygraph that was discarded years ago."

AZ State Police polygraph examiner,Cy Gilson, who tested the entire woods crew, said "...there can be NO validity to the test results in such a procedure. The pseudo examiner is a whore and the show's producers is the pimp."

Dr David Raskin has authored hundreds of papers on polygraphy as well as the preeminent textbooks on polygraph. As a court recognized expert he has testified in cases such as the Howard Hughes will, Jeffrey (Fatal Vision) McDonald, serial killer Ted Bundy, the DeLorean affair and the McMartin preschool case. Raskin has testified before British Parliament, the Israeli Kineset, and four times before the Judiiary Committee of the U.S. Senate with regard to Watergate and Iran/Contra. Dr. David Raskin said, "...I have always thought those TV programs are a disgrace. They trick people into participating and then use unprofessional and inaccurate methods merely for the purpose of entertaining their audiences. Any polygraph examiner who participates in such charades should not be allowed to practice. I have been asked to be the principal in such shows and have always refused. It is unfortunate that they lured you into being abused by them. I agree with the criticisms of Mr Martin."

By the way, this person claiming to be the county sheriff's nephew is NOT. Marlin Gillespie was the Sheriff, NOT Sanford Flake who left office after state officials investigated him. "Nephew" claimed the crew told diners that night at the Red Robin what happened. Red Robin didn't first open until '93 --in PA! He's a fraud. I'll publish more complete proof elsewhere.

In my book FIRE IN THE SKY I take each and every charge the debunkers made and, according to observers, totally "demolish" them, by pointing readers to experts, independent sources and verifiable records. This includes the other attackers cited on this forum, like William Spaulding of GSW, but especially Philip Klass, who I prove actually lied in numerous instances. If anyone would like to communicate personally without hiding behind anonymous fake names or addresses, my email address is *snip*


Please do not post personal contact information here.

edit on September 23rd 2010 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 12:49 PM
Travis Walton here again. Oops, I forgot to mention I came home after MOT and sought out the most rigorous new testing I could find. Polygraph is admissible in court in New Mexico and so is highly regulated by state law. I chose the firm with the highest recommendations, one that does work for the NM State Prison, the Albuquerque Police Dept., even the United States Marshal's Service. They applied the most refined and validated modern methods using state-of-the-art computer assisted, five-trace equipment with digital readout. I passed two tests flawlessly with "...a finding of: TRUTHFUL TO THE ABOVE RELEVANT QUESTIONS." Full details in my newly updated edition of FIRE IN THE SKY.

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 12:52 PM
Post deleted.

edit on 23/9/10 by spacevisitor because: It was as I realize now an unnecessary post.

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 02:18 PM
I've got to ask again.

Why after all of these years would you trivialize such an important part of your life by appearing on what is obviously a garbage show created for the mere enjoyment of the dregs of society. I have been following your story with the utmost interest since it first came out and although I do not believe in UFOs nor aliens visiting our planet your story has always been the one that did give me moments to pause and wonder. All of that has been lost on this one incident of which seems to make your account just as outlandish as all of them out there. So why did you even appear on the show?

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 03:10 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 03:13 PM
reply to post by Travis Walton

Good Morning Travis.....

Notwithstanding I have asked the ATS Mod Team to confirm your identity, welcome to ATS & thank you for joining our discussion.

Have you considered establishing your own thread to discuss your experiences with us?

I'm sure the members of ATS would be extremely interested if you did that.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

edit on 23-9-2010 by Maybe...maybe not because: Syntax

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 03:33 PM
Keep in mind this was a game show!!! And it didn't even air in the United States!

The polygraph examiner and the exam techniques themselves didn't even follow APA standards.

The $100,000 top prize has only been won a few times. There is a reason for that! Not because most of the contestants are liars, but because the show is rigged.

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 08:05 PM
reply to post by Sakrateri

Travis here. That's a fair question. The best answer being that I was an idiot. Too much overtime dulled my mind.
I should have seen it coming. I should have known better. But there were unique circumstances. The company where I had worked for almost a decade announced a corporate headquarters decision to downsize by permanently terminating the fifty most recently hired workers, regardless of their performance. My hire date put me on that list. I came home that same day to receive a phone call inviting me to be a “contestant” on a show I’d never seen that offered the possibility of winning up to $100,000. An opportunity to solve my layoff problem? I was wary. I began taping our negotiations. I watched an episode. I knew the examiner was their man, with every incentive to keep his employers from having to pay out big prize money. I wrote e-mails to a few of my friends about my apprehensions. I wrestled with doubt. I learned the show specialized in setting “contestants” up for dramatically devastating revelations. Still, all I had to do was answer 25 questions truthfully, what could be easier than that? Impossible, I later learned. In all the show’s years NO contestant had ever won the top prize. But I didn’t know that yet, so I asked, does the examiner use modern accepted methodology? I was assured he did. This was as far from true as you can get. The producer telling me this untruth may have believed it simply because the higher ups said so. Or they all, producers and network, may have been deceived by the examiner, who, with his training, absolutely had to know his methods were bogus. We went back and forth. I sent them my refusal. They came back and were very persuasive and said they were planning on responding to criticisms by making sure more prizes would be awarded. I so very foolishly yielded to the temptation. Even after arriving for taping I learned such disappointing details and got such bad vibes that I announced I was going home, but my objections were again negotiated away. I found out a major portion of episodes already taped never aired because the “contestants” withdrew and walked out.

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 08:16 PM
Travis here. I have heard two references now to previous contestants actually receiving the top prize. I distinctly remember my shock at learning no one had received it. If it's true a few did win top prize, it's possible the assistant producer telling me this was was new and misinformed. Or perhaps he was referring only to the previous season.
But, none or few, the implication is the same.

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 10:19 PM
Great to have you here Travis (assuming that you are who you say you are) and get your version of all this, I remember reading your story back in the 70's, so you're a living legend whether you like it or not,

Television works in mysterious ways, huh? If only the internet was any better,,, There's so many things I'd like to prod you about, I guess I'm not alone. But it must be strange for you to get those "What was it like?" questions today, half a lifetime after it happened.

Have you had any other experiences in your life, of any type, that you can somehow tie in with that 1975 incident, or can't stop wondering about?

edit on 23-9-2010 by Heliocentric because: the road to hell is paved with typos

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 11:36 PM
reply to post by Travis Walton

Just a thank you for showing up here and giving your side of the story. One question i would love to ask you and this might seem a tad off the wall, however here goes...

Since your encounter have you noticed you have had what seems like a quantum leap in your talent for, or your understanding of, any particular field. Maybe something artistic, or developed an interest in something you had no real opinions on beforehand? Something that might have shocked yourself and those around you? I'm not really talking about delving into this particular mystery and trying to understand its' fallout, rather something you were decidedly average at or below average at, you have seemingly developed a *talent* for.

Regards ....

edit on 23-9-2010 by FireMoon because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by Travis Walton

Welcome to ATS Travis! I'm three days late on this thread only to be thoroughly surprised to see you here. Other than Robbie Williams to come to this site a couple of years ago, it's an honor to have you drop by and become a member.

There are many, and I mean many pseudo-skeptic-debunkers who like to grace this site with their presence and offer us their negative and distorted views of how the world works in their eyes. Some are nice, some are not, some are quite smart and hard to refute while others are none of the above. Of course, I trust that other members will verify that you are indeed who you claim to be, so in the meantime I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Cheers and welcome.

I immediately saw through that show knowing whole heartedly that it's rigged. Sorry to see you being put in that situation and be taken advantage of for the purpose of entertainment.

A little about me and my MO...

I'm a hardcore believer. I've always known and had my own experiences twice. Once as a child when I was five, and another when I was 25. Unfortunately, you haven't been a member long enough for me to send private messages so I have to resort to the public forum. I agree with Maybe, maybe not's suggestion you should start your own thread introducing yourself. It would be great to see the debates involved and it would be advantageous to have you in the corner of others who are on the believing side of the fence. Of course, I know the debunkers still would never accept, but it would at least help those who are undecided.

Many of the tools used by the debunkers are that of ad hominem attacks and discrediting those based on who they associate with. Its all just a smoke screen and they have perfected the art of literary manipulation.

Anyways, I'm wondering something. What was going through your mind the second you saw Michael Shermer walk on stage?


<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in