The Amaury Rivera case

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by jackphotohobby

 

I can give you a number of ways to fake those pictures with a film camera, including repeat exposures, models, and messing during development. With scanned-in images the options for digital manipulation are numerous.

However, in a case like this the pictures are so poor, and the information so third-hand, that there's very little point in me commenting on it. It says the pictures were analysed by experts - in which case who? What did they find?

If there's a silence from 'debunkers' it's because it's very difficult to prove something or disprove something on the basis of poor evidence. All we can do is say what we think is probable given the available evidence.

Ummm, it was pre-digital camera tech and was reviewed by NASA (said it was not tampered with in any way). Of course had you read all the posts you would have known that.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by DaMod]

I had read all of the posts and you'll note that I said:

I can give you a number of ways to fake those pictures with a film camera, including repeat exposures, models, and messing during development. With scanned-in images the options for digital manipulation are numerous.

All of that applies to film. I'll give you a clue: Only the last sentence applies just to digital cameras. I included it because the images have been converted to a digital format. Maybe even scanned in from a book.

As for experts - name them.

Saying something like "reviewed by NASA" is pretty meaningless without who, why, where, when and the results. The website could be wrong. They may be cherry-picking the bits of the analysis which support their beliefs.

Anyone can say they've had an expert examine something. Without providing the evidence that an expert has examined something it's anecdotal.

The fact that information came from a website that takes George Adamski seriously makes me think their fact-checking probably isn't up to much...

I am not going to believe something wasn't tampered or that an expert endorsed it just because a website says so.

If I did I'd probably be waiting for a free iPod and my money to come through from a prince in Nigeria...

Originally posted by jackphotohobby
Saying something like "reviewed by NASA" is pretty meaningless without who, why, where, when and the results. The website could be wrong. They may be cherry-picking the bits of the analysis which support their beliefs.

Anyone can say they've had an expert examine something. Without providing the evidence that an expert has examined something it's anecdotal.

There was a book written on the case called "UFO Capture of Two F-14 Jets," it is detailed that the photos were examined by several civilian Nasa photo experts. The book was co-authored by retired Air Force pilot Wendelle Stevens.

www.ufophotoarchives.org...

I researched Stevens a bit and it appears that he is not one to simply believe everything he writes about.. he follows the scientific method with his discovery and merely presents the facts in the case.

Another detail that most continually ignore is that Amaury was harassed on several occasions by American agents after the encounter, even to the point of raiding his house looking for the negatives and pictures he took. this is attested to by many witnesses to the case.

What one really must ask is what does this guy Amaury, or Martin for that matter, have to gain from this? to be ridiculed? they didn't make any money and in every respect Amaury looks frightened and still in shock in the video IMO. let me ask any of you who think that he appears untruthful.. what would you do if this happened to you? well i can answer from experience that months, even years down the road you are still shocked, uncomfortable and beside yourself every time you are forced to remember much less recall it.


[edit on 3-2-2009 by kronos11]

You wouldn't have to think about the answer to the questions, it would come out natural, not like a rehearsed diatribe. The pauses and body language just reek of BS. Just imagine if that had happened to you, you'd not be able to stop talking and I'm sure in fine detail. the bloke has little to nothing to actually say, like he's just got out of bed and done nothing all day. he prolly spends more time explaining why he had a camera on him than what happened to him.

He might well of made no money, But he didn't know that would be the case before he tried.

There's just no explanation as to why/who/where/when the 2 little men got him out of his car that was prolly travelling along quite happily at 30mph or whatever.

Pure Bollocks mate, and if you can't see it, well I suppose some people are born blind.

[edit on 3-2-2009 by CrabPaste!!!]

Originally posted by CrabPaste!!!
Body language, arms folded, direction of eyes when answering etc etc

Yes correct, there is problem with sub conscious body language, break pattern recover, right hand sub raport mechanish, self anchor mechanism and blink rate and mimimick pattern when talking which shows that he is telling truth.

On introduction when he states name and city he is telling truth. slow left/right and deep breath. he made first hand raport with word "photograph" which says he didnt taked whose pictures, blink rate increase what mean he lied about his cousin wanted him to photograph "music group.

"Other people from portorico, I guess" hand raport for 3 of them.
"2 small beings" shoulders "i dont know" and eye raport. true
"Long hair to the shoulders" sub raport to his hair and mouth. true recolection from memory.
"warious projections" Arm ancor hand up, sub head raport.

Break pattern of thinking,
"First I remember" means repeating what we heard-words then change pattern - skip to his left side recolecting memory.
"Meteor or rock folling to earth" head tilt raport to defeseless.
After word "BUT" "whole world" is raport to his oppinion.

Some sort of "arrtificial island" sub hand up/eye raport with "black dirty sea" changeing pattern. "Pictures to public" hand opposite of speaking person.

Reporter break pattern with Jets question... "yes it was, they seem to BE" eyes Up to sky - sub pattern to recolect visual anchor angle of his eyes shows vision/visual memory angle of 30 degree.

Originally posted by CrabPaste!!!
You wouldn't have to think about the answer to the questions, it would come out natural, not like a rehearsed diatribe. The pauses and body language just reek of BS. Just imagine if that had happened to you, you'd not be able to stop talking and I'm sure in fine detail. the bloke has little to nothing to actually say, like he's just got out of bed and done nothing all day. he prolly spends more time explaining why he had a camera on him than what happened to him.

He might well of made no money, But he didn't know that would be the case before he tried.

i completely disagree. when investigating a case like this there are generally a number of factors that would be needed to substantiate it, not just one.. especially when it's something as debatable as whether or not this man is lying on camera. you are still leaving out the rest of the details of the case such as the fact that there was a wedding that day that he did attend, as well as the many family members corroborating the fact that american men raided his home shortly after the event.

at this point we'll never know until someone can thoroughly debunk the photos when nasa photo experts were given the prints and could not find them to be fakes. they felt even though some of the maneuvers the F14s display in the photos seem improbably they are not impossible.

Bumping this as he was right all along. He refers to the gulf as being black and dirty and this was done some years ago before the oil spill even happened. The higher ups in the universe aren't evil guys. :p Hopefully I'm not breaking rules for this being my first post? Just wanted to bring this to light.

www.youtube.com...#!

The video of his small interview. The next stage is a meteorite shooting down to earth into the gulf and their being an island in the gulf where the NWO will float on..

I saw a thread (can't find the link) about perfect triangles mined/formed into the gulf at the sea floor. Not sure how they play into the prophecy but it'd explain why they're there. Now, does the meteorite fall to earth before those islands are raised or after?

I personally Interviewed Amaury in 1991 and I believe his account of what happened...what most people do not know is Amaury also took pictures of the Creatures themself....but never to my knowledge shared them with anyone Horge Martin is well aware of this for I have a video of him sharing this information with John Lear while in Las Vegas in 1991......so a person is free to doubt if they choose....but I have learned that Ridicule without investigation is the crown of ignorance on the head of a fool.....author unknown

reply to post by ufosd


as a correction the spelling should have been Jorge Martin......

I don't know allot about the Amaury Rivera case..The pictures look good and clear better then some ive seen..They sure don't look fake and he strikes me as some one thats telling the truth ..I'm going to Bump this thread so i can read more about this then come back chat..sugarcookie1

As stated in another other thread started on this topic, where this thread seems to be the earliest one:

This, to me, seems more like a post-dated collusion.
If this had been talked about in 1988 then it would have validity, but, only after the fact that NWO is part of the fringe canon is this talked about.

It would be like someone suddenly popping up now, claiming they were told about, shown, 9-11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Fukishima, and any other number of things back in 1985, but, are only now coming forward about it.

The whole thing stinks.
Further, where are all these other corroborating witnesses and how is it that NONE of them have come forward until now, some 20 years later?

No, this whole thing stinks of an after the fact, post dated collusion cooked up by the claimed witness and his partner in crime that's posing as the researcher.

Additionally, this story came out in 2004, yet the really huge 2004 Tsunami that happened December 26 2004 killing some 200,000 people, not to mention the more recent tsunami that resulted in the Fukushima disaster, as well as any other note worthy front-page disasters that have occurred after 2004 that this guy could have predicted, but did not, are all conspicuously absent from his predictions.

In the game of hoaxing, it's always a good bet that mention of an impending meteor or comet impact on the planet will generate attention, and maybe even $$$ for the hoaxer, yet, for some reason, these meteors and comets that are always predicted never ever seem to pop up.

This case is a hoax, and if for any reason there's even a tiny kernel of truth to it, there's so much embroidery and falsification that it's as good as hoax.

Originally posted by DaMod

Ok look at the shadows on the UFO. Different angles however the shadow does not change. Heres the other problem. How fast does an F-14 fly? Notice the craft changed but the F-14 is still in the same position and placement.



and



He took a picture zoomed out and took another one and the very fast flying F-14 didnt move? Hmmmm

I'm not saying for sure that this is faked but the evidence unfortunatly points to hoax.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by DaMod]

I've taken your pictures and tried the best I could to zoom in the first one and overlay it on the second one. Resulting in the next gif.




I think the second one is simply a zoom. They are the same picture or he had a out of this world camera back in the 80's.

reply to post by 11thdimension


Indeed it is interesting. I'm no UFO expert. . yet but he sounds legit. It all seems to fall in order and him talking about a one government is suprising. Makes me think if aliens and a one world government have a connection.
P.S. This case has been here before. Use the Search engine lol

What would be his reasons to not release the other photo's?

just a reminder for those serious in UFO phenomena research. Puerto Rico at that time are experiencing UFO flaps so great that the Civil Defense ask for US Federal help. The phenomena ranged from noctural lights, entities, dead animals (vampirism), and so on.

the Amaury case should be viewed in regards with the state of puerto rico flap. its no more stranger than other cases. the difference is the photographs.

skeptics can debate all they want regarding the photo, but for real researchers i uggest reading up the excellent FSR magazine available as pdf in the internet. look for FSR 1994 vol 39 no 1 for puerto rico cases.

as usual, the more you research genuine UFO phenomena, the more question you will find. Drop the US ufologist myth like roswell, captured aliens/crafts, underground bases, gov conspiracy, mj12 and the rest. open up your mind to the real UFO cases all over the world..

do not assume that these entities are 'aliens' and do not assume UFO phenomena are 'nuts n bolt' physical things..

they are more sinister than that...

those people who are new to UFO phenomena , my auggestion is to read the Colares UFO flap in brazil 1977-1978, a massive UFO phenomenon documented in detail by brazilian armed forces.

look for bob pratt's excellent documentary in the internet.

be warned, do not expect photographs or videos. these cases are close encounter cases told by witnesses from multiple background. read the cases and notice the emerging pattern. we humans are good for pattern recognition, by reading and comparing UFO cases all over the world you will see for yourself the real pattern of UFO phenomena. Jacquess Vallee saw it, Hynek Saw it, John Keel saw it, Gordon Creighton saw it, even Aime Michel saw it though he dont like it..

those of you who insist on looking at photograph , i suggest 2 excellent photograph made by goverment offiicial :
- Lago de Cota photo, made by goverment mapping plane photomapping Costa Rica.
- Cordoba Yacanto photo, made by a military member of argentinian armed forces.