The UFO Iconoclast(s)

Friday, July 20, 2012

The Mars Man!

marsman.jpg
Anthony Bragalia re-discovered this image at forgetomori.com the other day.


Click HERE for the link.

This is one of the iconic images from his youth, and mine (and maybe yours too).

The 1950 German effort was an April 1st joke apparently.

What struck Anthony (and me) is how marvelous the created imagery was, much before CGI or Photoshop.

(Those Germans have always been masters of media.)

RR


Spitsbergen UFO crash of 1952 -- a set-up?

nr20.jpg
Nick Redfern resurrects the 1952 Spitsbergen UFO crash, insinuating that it was a plant -- a contrived set-up for nefarious purposes (of disinformation?)...

Click HERE to read Nick's take on the matter.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

A Corroborative UFO Photo?

rouen.jpg

The McMinnville/Trent photo of 1950 and the 1954 Rouen, France photo were provided in  Flying Saucers and UFOs 1968 {No.2, Page 24].

The similarity is blatant.

The Trent photo(s) -- there were two, as you know -- have been considered hoaxes by some (Robert Sheaffer particularly) and authentic by others (Bruce Maccabee, David Rudiak).

The Rouen photo, taken by a French Air Force pilot, has gnerally been considered to be authentic.

But doesn't the Rouen photo corroborate the Trent photo and sighting of four years earlier?

Martin J. Powell offers a thorough analysis of the two photographs which can be read by clicking HERE.

Mr. Powell noted that there is a question about the actual date of the Rouen photo, citing Vicente Juan Ballester-Olmos' corrected dating of 1957, and VJB's suggestion that the Rouen photo was a  doctored copy of the Trent UFO photo, although the Rouen photo contains more detail than the Trent UFO photo -- which is a virtual impossibility if one is making a copy of a photo; the new photo will be degraded not enhanced.

As with other UFO photos or incidents, the details are always compromised by something iffy; in this case the date of the Rouen photo and the suggestion by a bona fide UFO researcher -- Ballester-Olmos -- that the Rouen photo was a copy.

Yes, there are legitimate questions about the Trent photos -- addressed by Phil Klass and others, such as why they didn't develop their film for some time if, indeed, they thought they had captured a flying saucer.

But if the Rouen photo is authentic -- although that seems to be up in the air also -- doesn't it give validation to the Trent photos?

And, as we usually ask, were there other sightings and/or photos with the air-foil configuration that is unique to these photographs -- either before 1950 or after 1954/1957?

While some discount pursuing such sightings, from long ago -- we are of that ilk ourselves, usually -- the "saucer" seen in these two photos invite retro-investigation....to corroborate the Trent photos and to show that flying saucers of the 1950s time-frame seem to have had tangibility, and aero-dynamic characteristics, which is no longer the case.

Today's UFOs are amorphous generally, without substance or materiality.

What happened to UFOs?

Why have they changed?

RR


Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Asimov, Wikileaks, and a methodology fro UFO research?


predict.jpg


Psychohistory!

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Green Fireballs....redux too?

Anthony Bragalia writes that green fireballs are being spotted again.

Click HERE for his report.

Monday, July 16, 2012

What are UFOs looking for?


Sensible persons know that flying saucers and/or UFOs have been reconnoitering the Earth for millennia.

But why?

What are UFOs looking for?

Sure, they’ve gathered water and soil samples if witness accounts can be accepted. And some say they’ve accumulated animal parts, even human beings (temporarily it seems).

But there is no definitive proof or indication showing that UFOs are collecting or actually surveilling anything.

Even the scrutiny of military bases and nuclear facilities, amply documented by Robert Hastings, has been benign….for years now.

And Vallee’s conjecture that UFOs may just be seeking attention suggests an alien psychopathology.

UFO researchers – I use the term loosely – and UFO buffs might discern a pattern in UFO sightings and alleged landings if they (the mavens) really put their minds to it.

But UFO followers are attracted to the sensationalized aspects of UFO sightings, with the modus being overlooked pretty much.

There may be or should be a common factor (or two) in UFO sightings but where are the forensics?

Is there a purpose – even an eternal, long, very long, range purpose -- for the UFO surveys of the Earth?

Are UFOs just a bevy of visiting alien constructs, with nothing to do, other than observe a gaudy planet that houses a panoply of beings who live, struggle, and die, with little to show for their existence: a kind of burlesque that UFOs find entertaining or fascinating in some extraterrestrial, obtuse way?

And why don’t obsessed UFO quidnuncs try to find out why their obsessional interest plies us with a mysterious presence, and has done so for all of human history?

Why are UFOs here? What do they want, if anything?

Or are UFOs just a mindless phenomenon – a gross mental aberration of humankind over the years? A collective, imagined figment of mankind?

RR

Sunday, July 15, 2012

Chase Brandon [redux]

Robbie Graham has provided a comprehensive, he writes, follow-up to the Chase Brandon story.

Click HERE to access that follow-up