Roswell Slides Solve the mystery in 1.5 minutes (Your independent verification welcomed)

a reply to: HeywoodFloyd

Who are the "deniers" now?

Regarding Dolan -

Richard is sadly whining presently on his blog at KGRA Radio -

"I should add to anyone who hasn't been paying attention that I never at any point endorsed the slides as representing something extraterrestrial."

Bloody Hell? Compare that with his quote from just a couple days ago from Reuters -

""Analysis of the body ... suggested this is not a mummy and not a human, not a mammal and not a model," says enthusiast Richard Dolan, Reuters reports."

So which is it Richard? The poor fella can't remember what he said just a few days ago. Oh, and he surely is playing the party line until Maussan's check clears.

If you accept the hospitality, the fee, and you stand on stage opining about this rubbish then you have endorsed it.

He was brought in to add a bit of credibility and sell more tickets.

And he sold his credibility for his speaking fee.

a reply to: LiteraryJourney

Dolan got sucked in, maybe for a free trip to Mexico, or, maybe to see for himself what all the hoopla was about, or both.

After he saw what they had he was pretty reticent about it all. I don't think he did any harm beyond how many of his followers are mad at him over it (which is pretty silly considering).

He's in a tough spot, he has to stay relevant, and if this did turn out to be "something" he would have been remiss not being there.

I can cut RD lots of slack, he was brought in at the last moment to help with sales (make no mistake about that). That all said, my slack will dissolve if he falls for another Jaime Mausson deal though.

a reply to: Springer

Personally I think he could have been a bit more scrutinizing and critical. While reticent, he was also a bit too accepting of the possibility of it being an alien (while he denies this, there's enough quotes from him on the Web that prove otherwise). He's supposed to be an intelligent researcher, and yet he let an "impressive" story (which was likely invented whole-cloth) color his judgment from recognizing an obvious museum environment in the picture. It's not good for a researcher to be so gullible, especially in this field.

I know that Stanton Friedman was considering going to BeWitness, after a brutally cold winter in Canada, to see the slide first hand so he could report on it after the event. However, when his request for the evidence from Dew, prior to the event, showed no ties to Roswell he decline a week before. He also felt his appearance would lend credibility to it being from the Roswell crash and there was nothing he saw to support that.

From what I understand, Stanton had been bitten by the Santilli event where he was actively reviewing Santilli's claims during the timeframe the film was first shown at the London Museum public event. Santilli apparently used Stanton's comments about looking into the film as a way to lend credibility to it at the event. Stanton, I imagine, was not eager to be put in that position again.

I know firsthand that Don Schmitt had very strong misgivings about the slide, but the experts they lined up over the years were telling them they had something unusual. And the experts they had were no amateurs either. It seems even the experts had not done as well as the Roswell Slide Team.

On Kevin Randles recent blog update Don is admitting that if they reproduce the deblurring, which I'm sure they will, that he'd agree the RWST had deciphered the placard. I'd bet the rest of the evidence convinces him too. I'll add that Don Schmitt has done some laudable work on the Roswell case and is responsible for uncovering many first-hand witnesses. I don't think he'd include the BeWitness event in his successes.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

I'm rather curious about these "experts" they questioned. Were these experts well-respected in their fields or middle-of-the-line, or did they sit at the proverbial kiddie tables in their studies? Because it's just so obviously a museum (the neighboring exhibit spoke of that much) and you'd have to be pretty dim to miss that.

a reply to: Kojiro

I didn't save the link to the list of slide review experts, but maybe someone else can post that here. In the list were some solid people, but some were less qualified too. Don said they had a hard time getting people to look at it due to the perceived subject matter.

I'll try rewatching the event and the credits on it.

regarding Richard Dolan:

there is no doubt he got "sucked in" - as Springer suggests.

But he was never shown the slides BEFORE going to Mexico.


WHY ?


Two possibilities here:

1.- Adam Dew - who owns the slides - denied showing them to Dolan.

2.- Naivety and lack of scrutinizing and critical thinking on Dolan's side - as Kojiro implies.

in my opinion, Richard Dolan should have asked as a PRE-REQUISITE to see and examine the slides BEFORE accepting to take part in the Mexico City show.


and there is something more...
that I will post later on.

originally posted by: draknoir2
a reply to: HeywoodFloyd

Who are the "deniers" now?

What do you mean?
Can you elaborate?

Since two members of the Roswell Slides Research Group have privately asked me to post the images I obtained with the SmartDeblur software processing of the slides placard, here they are:

This is the original file:



First, I rotated the original file, to get a better visibility of the writing on the placard:



higher resolution here:
files.abovetopsecret.com...

then I processed the placard, and I obtained this:



higher resolution here:
files.abovetopsecret.com...

Note: I did not use any “preset kernel” in the processing.
The SmartDeblur software generated the "kernel" by itself.

As it can be seen, my results are consistent with the results obtained by the Roswell Slides Research Group.

Parts of the writings on the placard can be clearly seen:

MUMMIFIED BODY OF TWO YEAR OLD BOY

and in the last line: San Francisco, California
(perhaps also L. S. Palmer)

I have already described the whole procedure I used a few days ago, in this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

As Art Director first, and Marketing & Communications Executive later,
I have 18 years experience in using imaging processing software,
so I can confirm with confidence what the Roswell Slides Research Group have found about the placard.

-----------------------

Note: The whole procedure - from downloading/installing the software to the final results - took me about 40 minutes.

Just wow!

I hope people are demanding their money back

This subject just gets worse and worse. So experts analysed the slides and said it showed a non human. They did not bother to de-blur the plaque , which would have been simple, as many people have shown already

When will people learn

originally posted by: HeywoodFloyd

originally posted by: draknoir2
a reply to: HeywoodFloyd

Who are the "deniers" now?

What do you mean?
Can you elaborate?

This comment from Kevin Randle's site illustrates my point:

Of course, given that you are (clearly) obsessed with denying extraterrestrials and very paranoid on believing that every high impact UFO witness wants to deceive you, if the slide owner were to have shown the slides to ufologists immediately after finding them, then you could easily have labeled him of being a UFO fanatic or a desperate hoaxer, without even moving from your armchair (again).

Funnier yet since the debunking of the slides could have been accomplished from anyone's armchair.

On the opposite, Adam Dew, Tom Carey and Maussan, in spite of the overwhelming evidence, still persist...

Yes they do. It's going from denial to delusion.

Full Definition of DELUSION 1 : the act of deluding : the state of being deluded 2 a : something that is falsely or delusively believed or propagated b : a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary; also : the abnormal state marked by such beliefs

originally posted by: draknoir2
It's going from denial to delusion.

Jaime Maussan on Twitter 1 hour ago -

I want to denounce the disinformation campaign to make the public believe that the case be of Roswell has been resolved and it is a Mummy

Google translate, of course, isn't an exact science and we cannot rely on software to interpret lines of text as the translation kernel may have been tampered with. So perhaps he really wrote,

"The game's up. I hold up my hands. I admit it's a mummy as was obvious from the start. Schmitt and Carey made me do it."

originally posted by: thepixelpusher

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: thepixelpusher

Do you have the rest of that Chewed Bread recipe? Sounds delicious.

Dogfish Head Brewery did a similar beer recipe on their show.

www.dogfish.com...

originally posted by: HeywoodFloyd
I just want to add, for everyone who wants to try, than you don't need a preset kernel to do it.
The SmartDeblur software generates the "kernel" itself.

These are the steps:

once you have installed the software (trial version):

1.- open the original placard file >>> placard-TEXT1.jpg

2.- settings of SmartDeblur:

A.- Auto-detect blur

B.- Blur size: 100x100


then:

3.- press Analyze blur

4.- wait for the processing to be done by the software (1 to 4 minutes)


after processing is done:

5.- smoothness at 80%

and you get the results...


6.- save the file


--------------------------------------------

here is the SmartDeblur tutorial:

smartdeblur.net...

Has anyone applied this software to the Ramey Letter?

a reply to: draknoir2

Yes they do. It's going from denial to delusion.

Next is rationalization.

ra·tion·al·ize/ˈraSHənlˌīz,ˈraSHnəˌlīz/
verb
1.attempt to explain or justify (one's own or another's behavior or attitude) with logical, plausible reasons, even if these are not true or appropriate.

originally posted by: HeywoodFloyd
Since two members of the Roswell Slides Research Group have privately asked me to post the images I obtained with the SmartDeblur software processing of the slides placard...

Thank you very much for that. I'm really hoping that this collective effort is going to stake this story so thoroughly that some yet-to-be-born ufologist will not revive it as unsolved case in a few decades.

We need to put this phony down for all time.

a reply to: CardDown

you're welcome, CardDown.
I had one spare hour last Sunday, I was curious, so I decided to give it a try.

In the end, it takes just a decent amount of intelligence.

Which, perhaps, is a requisite the “promoters” are not equipped with.

What I find ironic is that there are so many around who proclaim themselves to be “Investigative Journalists” , “UFO Researchers”, they make conferences everywhere and write dozens of books...

and NOT EVEN ONE of them has even tried in person the SmartDeblur thing.

So, what are they investigating?

a reply to: draknoir2

Understood, draknoir2,
and, of course, I agree.

The deniers are those who deny the truth. Whichever it is.

In the case in question, the “promoters”.