UFO Conjecture(s)

Saturday, July 12, 2014

The Aztec/Roswell Bodies? (Support for the Roswell slides?)

As many of you know, we spent much of 2013 presenting our view that Frank Scully’s book, Behind the Flying Saucers was really about Roswell, not Aztec, and we presented our supporting view(s) here, at this blog, which you can find via Google.

What interests me, currently, amidst the Roswell slides imbroglio, is the descriptions of the alleged bodies discovered in the Aztec (actually Rowell) flying saucer crashes as enumerated by Scully.

These comments are from Scientist X, given to students and media at The University of Denver according to Scully:

“ … men [were found], ranging in ages … from thirty-five to forty years old … Their bodies had been charred to a dark brown color.” [Page 28 of the 1950 Popular Library Edition, paperback]

“ … dead men … found in the second craft … had not suffered from burns …and were all of fair complexion … of small stature. No different from us, except for height, and lack of beards. [Page 28, ibid.]

Scully’s protagonists said:

“We took the little bodies out, and laid them on the ground … They were normal from every standpoint and had no appearance of being what we would call on this planet ‘midgets.’ They were small in stature but well proportioned. The only trouble was that their skin seemed to be charred a very dark chocolate … [apparently] burned as a result of air rushing through that broken porthole window or something going wrong with the means by which the shipped was propelled and the cabin pressurized.” [Page 116, ibid]

“ … they were dead, from either burns or the bends.” [Page 117, ibid]

“What has been done with the people that were on the ship? … some of them had been dissected, and studied by the medical division of the Air Force and that from the meager reports … received, they had found that these little fellows were in all respects perfectly normal human beings [sic], except for their teeth … Their teeth were prefect. [Page 119, ibid]

As contended by me, earlier here, Bernerd Ray who worked for Scully’s Silas Newton [see 2013 blog posts], seems to have taken photos of the beings now known as the Roswell slides, and shown them to Newton.

And they are, indeed from Roswell, not Aztec, which was a cover story devised by Newton at the behest of the Army Air Force with whom he maintained oil contracts.

Frank Scully’s wife saw and reported upon the Ray photos, which are still extant, and may be the slides that The Roswell Team is touting.

There is much that has not been investigated about the conjunction of Aztec and Roswell for many reasons, some stemming from the contention that Aztec is a viable, real story of a flying saucer crash, and strongly defended as such by Frank Warren and chief defenders Scott and Suzanne Ramsey, along with authors/researchers William Steinman, Wendelle Stevens, and Richard Thomas, all of whom believe that Aztec is a singular event when, in reality, it was a fictive cover story, promulgated by Silas Newton, as noted.

RR

52 Comments:

  • I understand that Stanton Friedman is the authority on Aztec now, in conjunction with the Ramseys, so unless your comments are in line with Friedman's firm ideas, I think we can safely discard them. Sorry!

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, July 13, 2014  

  • One glaring double bind among many in this alleged scenario is the “authentication” process, which ultimately may ( at best) cast reasonable credibility to what could be considered a possibility versus a reality. In other words, the skeptics will remain ( rightfully skeptical) and those who want to make the leap of faith undoubtedly will do so. And so a final comment is reluctantly inserted as my postscript to this comedy.
    If some diabolical toy manufacturer designed a puzzle where in the pieces will never fit you have the perfect metaphor for Roswell, an open ended game designed for perturbation like fly paper..
    Consequently everyone concerned in this feeding frenzy are back to square one and a circle will have been closed replete with all the trappings of faux certainty in any opinion will remained attached to this Venus Fly Trap of the mind. The pages fall away from the calendar, summer turns to fall once again, and in the distance the search continues for the Lost Dutchman Mine lacking a conclusive argument as it was designed by intent, a lure for making a cartography out of cloud patterns frozen in place. No further comments is required or called for,

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, July 13, 2014  

  • Yes, Bruce, it's "the Roswell Curse," one instance of the "UFO" curse that haunts hard-core victims of the delusion.

    THE UFO CURSE: No matter how long you live, you will never know any more about UFOs than you know today. You will never know any more about what UFOs really are, or where they come from. You will never know any more about what the U.S. Government really knows about UFOs than you know today. As you lie on your own death-bed you will be as mystified about UFOs as you are today. And you will remember this curse. --PK

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Sunday, July 13, 2014  

  • How can these descriptions relate to the Roswell slides, since the slides apparently depict a creature with an unnaturally large cranium, and no reference is made to that here: "No different from us, except for height, and lack of beards"..."they had found that these little fellows were in all respects perfectly normal human beings [sic], except for their teeth …" If the slides showed a body that only differed from regular folk by virtue of a clean shave and good dental work, then Anthony and co. would have a rather hard time authenticating its other-worldliness!

    By Blogger Tristan Eldritch, at Sunday, July 13, 2014  

  • I'd really like to see more research on the plague-outbreak aspect that Nick Redfern discusses in a few of his works.

    By Blogger Clayton Robertson, at Sunday, July 13, 2014  

  • Tristan:
    I agree, the Scully description seems rather vague and doesn't match what Tony Bragalia has said.

    I can't stand the lack of specifics given when it comes to the alien body stories. Tony mentioned in one of his comments that the facial features seemed insectoid and mentioned the Dr. Sarbacher story. Although if I remember correctly Sarbacher was merely told the aliens were small in stature similar to insects- as in low mass to better withstand g-force. As to actually looking like an insect- I don't really know. That would involve an exoskeleton, compound eyes, etc. Although Tony also mentioned that the Glenn Dennis sketch has some notable similarities.

    Clayton:
    Nick said they he is compiling all the new data on the Japanese balloon/plague angle and will present it sometime in the future. I look forward to it as well. However, whatever the slides show, supposedly it has nothing to do with the Japanese angle.

    And on that note- is there any credible folks left alive that have claimed witness to the alien bodies? If so they should do an alien photo lineup and ask which one is what they saw- if any. I know this wouldn't prove anything, but could be a nice bit of circumstantial evidence.

    By Blogger Daniel Hurd, at Sunday, July 13, 2014  

  • Clayton
    I write about it in my latest book, Close Encounters of the Fatal Kind, but a few people have also asked about it, so at some point in the near future I'll do an online article that covers it all.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Rich, what is the evidence linking Ray to Newton in 1947? I recall you once "suggested" it.

    Best Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Don:

    It's online here, archived I guess.

    You might Google it.

    I'm involved with something more serious which will be noted here soon.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Rich: If it is in the documents provided by Jose Caravaca earlier this year, those are no longer at the provided links.

    Rich: "I'm involved with something more serious which will be noted here soon."

    Never a dull moment on Iconoclasts.

    Best Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • No, Don...

    They are my original posts and should be found using Google.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • The entire ET scenario is a defensive and projected stereotype against the threat of our logical determinism being attacked by polymorphic evidence. There is no need for extraterrestrials to be on the surface of the earth when remote telemetry will do and especially thousands of visits counted in centuries unless they are appallingly stupid. The mistake of anthropomorphism superimposed on cellular intelligence is a case of both Apophenia ( fallible superimposition ) and
    Pareidolia which creates non existent meaning. The nature of this defies sentience as a driver of any intent as Jacques Vallee pointed out that it is sociopathic in it’s effects as opposed to natural phenomenon. He likened this amoral behaviorism as analogous to electricity We benefit from it’s use and yet if we stick our finger in a socket...as many have been harmed as have proved benignly influenced. If this is a case analogous to the arrival of the Europeans creating mass diseases where is the concern for microbial contamination? What are the odds that any species would breath the same atmosphere, have the same gravitational forces to allow muscular mobility, have the same evolutionary path and yet be seen as polymorphic? The aversion to the possibility that this is all related to human consciousness has more to do with a comfort zone of considerations tied to a need for predictability and yet in the scope of this there is no predictability. it depends on who is looking. This intentional glossing over of the obvious is religiosity and as John Keel said, the creation of one as the logical determinism of skeptics refuses to accept logical causation as a fallible premise. It is absolutism as a patent bias matched by an equal refusal of ET advocates to review the whole of the evidence. Science has proven again and again there is no such thing as blind positivism. Yet we have a small cadre of those who propose that a Kodachrome slide whose providence is entirely circumstantial as well as it’s existence solves what constitutes a case with contradictory evidence erased from consideration. A case of the blind leading the blind? Or the three blind men and the elephant?

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Rich, interesting there are no on-topic responses to your article here on Aztec/Roswell, or the principals. Some years ago I commented on my research on the case (which isn't much, really). Since I didn't use ufology sources (such as Carr), my study veered off into California, rather than New Mexico (but found a trace leading to NM). I also found a trace to Africa, which made me recall that Dr Gee's first downed saucer was supposed to have occurred in the Sahara. In fact, that was the only one mentioned that actually crashed. The Aztec one "gently pancaked to earth like a slow motion of Sonia Henie imitating a dying swan." (for the Youth: Sonia was a famous skater).

    Perhaps everyone has had their say about it, and await the publication of the slides. If the focus is poor then they will not be satisfying to anyone, I'd guess. In order to make the case, there will have to be something more.

    I can't think of another classic photograph ufo case that has, besides the ufo/et photo(s), the rest of the roll, or several rolls shot at the same time and place available.

    If Eisenhower is in them, we have strong evidence available via his dress. He might wear civvies on casual occasions while still in the army, but he would not wear a uniform if he were not. I'd expect any other people (or cars) in the photos to give us a date range.

    The two slides alone will prove nothing and perhaps not even be evidence for much of anything, based on the descriptions we've gotten so far. But the other slides, those, as you would say, "intrigue".

    Best Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Nick, I've greatly enjoyed your work since reading Final Events...heck, that one got me started down the rabbit hole. :)

    The MJ-12/biowar stuff was really interesting. I'll have to share some of my stuff with you guys one of these days
    ...

    By Blogger Clayton Robertson, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Clayton:

    Anything interesting can be written up and submitted to the blog owner as a guest post.

    By Blogger Ross, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Bruce:
    You speak about the improbability of aliens physically visiting earth, and the nearly impossible idea that they would look anything even remotely humanoid. These are great points.

    First I would like to point out various forms of evolutionary convergence that have taken place here on earth.
    A few examples would be how Koalas have fingerprints identical to those of humans, mammals such as cetaceans have evolved flippers and find similar to sharks, and thylacines are marsupial dead ringers for canines, just a few examples. Granted these animals all evolved here on earth- and possibly all coming from one common ancient ancestral bacteria. So your argument still stands. Not impossible, but yet still improbable.

    I would also like to point out how we humans seek planets similar to our own when exploring the universe. If the planet is not unlike our own, maybe the odds of life developing similarly is greater.

    Another good point you make is why would they physically come here. Surely they have capabilities to observe us without ever putting their alien boots on the ground. I would speculate that any beings that may have come here may be biological drones. Possibly even designed to come here specifically.

    My final point is that we are all making assumptions and speculating one way or the other because we do not have any real facts to base anything off of.

    I am not a rock solid believer in the ET angle. I try to remain open to any possibilities. Although maybe I am slightly biased because I am hopeful.

    By Blogger Daniel Hurd, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Daniel
    I think your line of thinking has a flaw in it's midst which is all of your examples are terrestrial ie: share a common environment here on Earth whereas in the case of exobiology they would likely not.
    Even drones would have been incredibly redundant in my view considering the length of their sightings etc over time as well as the lack of a coherent craft type to the extent that their variety is improbable.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Let's not stray off-topic fellows.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Rich,
    I apologize for not being more educated on Scully and Aztec in the event my questions are redundant and the information made previously available.
    My question is- who were Newton and GeBauer's source? Has anyone found evidence of whom they had contact with?
    And if I'm understanding this all correctly, Bernard and Hilda Ray knew Silas Newton? This would be a hugely strange coincidence.

    Again, sorry if this is considered common knowledge here. I haven't read Behind the Flying Saucers (should be on my doorstep soon) and only have a basic understanding of the Scully-Aztec-Newton-GeBauer story.

    By Blogger Daniel Hurd, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • Daniel:

    Read the Scully book.

    And see if you can find my whole panoply about the connection of the Rays (Bernerd anyway) and Newton, which is online here (2013 postings).

    You should be able to find access via Google with the right search queries.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, July 14, 2014  

  • who were Newton and GeBauer's source?

    Newton and Gebauer were their own "sources."

    Aztec silliness. Ufology's Dracula strikes again.

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Rich, if I were to read Scully's book, as you keep suggesting in posts, wouldn't that tempt me to then read Roswell books, which would cause irreversible madness?

    (I've only read one Roswell book, and I believe it caused me no harm because it was written by a Brit.)

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Daniel: "My question is- who were Newton and GeBauer's source?"

    The outline of the story in Scully's book appears in reports in 1949 reportedly told by Newton. The "directors cut" version is in Scully's book in 1950. It is an antique kind of science fiction or science fantasy, for 1950, that would be really interesting if it had mystery airships or interplanetary artillery shells rather than flying saucers in it. My wild guess is Newton's sources were fiction, probably written prior to the mid 1930s.

    Since Ray and Newton were in the oil business and since both were, we are told, in NM in 1947, it stands to reason that...

    Anyway, in 1949 we have a story that dates itself to Spring 1948. As far as I know, no version of the story prior to 1949 has come to light.

    It would be very interesting if someone publishes proof of Newton telling the tale in 1947.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Don:

    Newton was told by Ray about the Roswell "crash" and Newton then incorporated the tale into his Aztec fiction, as a favor to the Army Air Force.

    As to when Ray told Newton, who knows?

    But Ray showed him the slides; yes the infamous slides discussed here.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Rich: "...as a favor to the Army Air Force."

    I've wondered about that. The FBI, following policy, booted the matter to AFOSI who managed to drag their way to a phone and make some calls. Nobody would tell them anything, including the Golf Club at which Newton was supposed to have told the story. AFOSI, in the face of this unconquerable resistance, drop the matter. After all, what's left to do? Anyway, they decided it was a hoax. Whether they thought Newton was hoaxing or Cabot, the informant, was hoaxing (or both), is not entirely clear.

    I have to wonder about the FBI as well. One gets the impression from the files that Newton was a person of interest to them and kept tabs on him (suppposedly the FBI file on Gebauer is large). But they couldn't identify oil businessman "Cy Newton" as oil businessman Silas Newton. Unable to put 2 and 2 together, they decided it was a saucer report and per policy sent it off to AFOSI.

    Cute.

    Best Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • So it sounds like Ray was Newton's source. Newton and GeBauer became Scully's source. Yet for some reason instead of this being a 1947 Roswell event- it was changed, possibly by Ray to protect his source? If I'm following the logic correctly.

    On the flip side, like Don, Paul, and others have said Newton and GeBauer were their own source. Maybe basing the story on classic Sci-Fi stories.
    Although I find it odd that the story has little grey men and not any of the other antique aliens common around that time.

    I too wonder if they can find any evidence of Newton telling his tale earlier than 1949. If he was telling people back in 47 it would mean that it was possibly based off Roswell, not Aztec.

    I still wonder where the photos were taken. I don't feel like RAAF would keep the bodies or display them in glass cases. It sounds like a more permanent locale. Which then leaves more questions than answers.

    By Blogger Daniel Hurd, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Daniel and Don:

    Let me go through this again...

    Ray showed Newton his slides, sometime after 1947.

    Newton took the stroy and made up his Aztec fiction to help his Air Force contacts maintain the Roswell cover-up.

    It doesn't mean that Newton had to talk about Roswell or Aztec in 1947.

    How would that make sense in the scenario I've presented?

    Newton saw the slides, heard the Roswell story from Ray, and used it to gain favor with his Air Force oil contractors, by creating a fictional story (Aztec) that would take people away from Roswell, which would re-spark if Ray's slides came to public view.

    Quit asking about when Newton first broached the topic. It was after Roswell, and was used to create the Aztec fiction.

    Sheesh.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • LOL
    Ok Rich,
    Sorry I was confused before. That makes perfect sense. I had some how glossed over the Air Force oil contract aspect.
    That was the missing piece for my mind. I kept wondering why Newton was creating a fictional version of Roswell.

    We still don't know how or why the Rays were allowed to view and photograph this humanoid. Who did they know that would have given them access?

    By Blogger Daniel Hurd, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • The initial story, Daniel, was that Ray stumbled upon the Roswell crash while he was on a geologic dig with others.

    And he took the photos surreptitiously.

    But then the placard and glass case came into the story and this is partly why I wrote, something smells in the account.

    A lot of loose, differing ends.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Rich: "Quit asking about when Newton first broached the topic. It was after Roswell, and was used to create the Aztec fiction."

    Seems too strong a response to my writing "it would be interesting if he did", but 1949 is the date we have from the contemporary records. And that, I think, fits the history of the ufo story in the US from the time of the '47 wave. 1949 is when the equation ufo=et becomes a matter of public discussion.

    Being an outsider to the ET debate, I don't have to have an opinion whether or not Aztec and Roswell are involved in an ET cover-up, or how they are related, or whether the object photographed perhaps by Bernerd Ray is anything at all.

    I haven't been able to convince myself that Newton would have told the story as part of a doodlebug scam (unless he had a specific sucker in mind who was both rich and a early adopter of ET), so your suggestion he told it at the request of the AF appeals to me.

    I haven't lost track of this story being about oil, and my research instinct is to follow the money, rather than 'Roswell'.

    Best Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Don:

    Don't mistake my pique for inherent testiness about your concerns.

    I just wwant to keep my scenario as simple as possible, and it is a simple view I admit.

    But it's a conjecture that I'm pushing for a set of reasons.

    Newton created Aztec, despite Frank Warren's and Scott Ramsey's views to the contrary.

    Scully was just reporting on a fictional account he thought was real.

    The clues are in the Scully book and the Newton/GeBauer aftermath.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Rich: "Newton created Aztec, despite Frank Warren's and Scott Ramsey's views to the contrary.

    Scully was just reporting on a fictional account he thought was real.

    The clues are in the Scully book and the Newton/GeBauer aftermath."

    Rich, we are in agreement on the above.

    Best Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • Don:

    You and I are usually on the same page, once my head unthickens.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014  

  • I still haven't seen any ACTUAL evidence that Silas Newton and Bernerd Ray personally knew one another, much less Newton being Ray's boss, which I seriously doubt. (For one thing, they worked completely different areas.) Where did these claims come from? ACTUAL references please.

    Newton and Ray MIGHT have known one another or of one another, seeing as how they were in the same racket (oil exploration). But this is a long way from the assertion that Ray showed Newton the slides and this is where Newton got the idea for the Aztec story.

    As for Newton and Gebauer, they were trying to get the media interested in an alleged Mojave Desert/Death Valley saucer crash several months before Frank Scully started writing about crashes in New Mexico and Arizona in Variety Magazine. This time Newton claimed he and Gebauer were prospectors, Newton first going under the name of "Michael McFadden", then "Buck Fitzgerald" with Gebauer being his scientist friend "Meyers" and then "Mase Carney".

    Allegedly they came across a crashed saucer with two small men or dwarves racing away and disappearing in the dunes. First Newton pitched the story in early August 1949 to a Long Beach radio announcer, who didn't bite, instead called the FBI, who contacted AFOSI. About 10 days later Newton changed the story a little bit and it got picked up by a few Hearst INS newspapers like the Bakersfield Californian and San Francisco Examiner.

    The story was datelined Mojave, CA (about 60 miles east of Bakersfield), which was another of Newton and Gebauer's oil stomping grounds. Interestingly, Scully in his book wrote of meeting Newton and his scientist friend "Dr. G." about 3 weeks later in Mojave. (See about p. 26 of "Behind the Flying Saucers"), also about them exploring the area and allegedly planning to do some test wells.

    It seems like the Mojave/Death Valley crashed saucer hoax was a dry rehearsal for Aztec. Newspaper articles and FBI document:

    http://www.roswellproof.com/post-1947-roswell-references.html

    (See August 1949)

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • David:

    While your pre-Aztec tale may be true, when Newton presented his views to Ray, Ray told him he had a real crashed saucer story, supported by slides of an alien being -- Roswell.

    Newton then took his original musings, combined them with the Ray Roswell information and concocted the Aztec fib, which his Air Force buddies were pleased to hear as it helped take away the possible resurgent spotlight on Roswell which they needed to keep covered-up.

    My scenario has beeen outlined here at this blog and at other blogs of ours.

    It's a conjecture surely, but just as reasonable or far-fetched as the Ramey memo decipherment, which also is a conjecture.

    People can take it for what it is: a suggestion with coincidental supporting story-lines (from the Roswell myth and Aztec fiction.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • RRR wrote:
    "It's a conjecture surely, but just as reasonable or far-fetched as the Ramey memo decipherment, which also is a conjecture."

    You went further than mere conjecture, claiming Newton was Ray's boss. Made that up too, did we?

    Ramey memo decipherment is more than "conjecture." It is a real document in well-established historical circumstances in which multiple English linguistic rules (word lengths, spelling, grammar, semantics, historical context, etc.) can be applied to restrict possibilities, various reader interpretations can be compared for commonalities, and readings tested objectively by computer for probability values.

    In your world, "conjecture" is making up scenarios out of thin air while writing "conjecture" as if it were fact. Again, what backs up your claim that Newton was Ray's boss, or even that the two men knew one another?

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • David:

    In my original posts I included a payroll document, provided to me by Spanish UFO researcher, Jose Caravaca.

    You can find it via Google.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • Rich: "You can find it via Google."

    I haven't (or, Google hasn't) been able to find it, although I did find the discussions that went on here last year and read them. I felt like a guest at a family get together where a fight breaks out over ancient wrongs and resentments. One wants to excuse oneself from the table, go out and have a smoke, and hope the parties will come to their senses.

    Best Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • Don:

    If I get a break -- from some media stuff I'm immersed in --I'll find the URLs for the blog posts and put them online.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • I had a good dig using the blogger search tool but did not manage to locate it. Was it definitely published as part of a blog entry?

    By Blogger Ross, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • Yes, Ross...

    A three-parter.

    Try using Bernerd Ray and Silas Newton, Aztec/Roswell in your search query.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • If it's this post...

    http://ufocon.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-roswell-slides-or-aztec-slides.html

    The linked document is no longer online nor is it cached by Google.


    By Blogger Ross, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • The old blog from 1/18/2014 has two broken links with the alleged proof.

    http://ufocon.blogspot.com/2014_01_12_archive.html

    The blog says, "Noted Spanish UFO researcher Jose Antonio Caravaca has found this document (about an oil drilling request for Sedona, Arizona) from the Oil and gas Conservation Commission of Arizona (The document dates from April 1965)"

    So instead I Googled "Oil and gas Conservation Commission of Arizona, 1965" and got this:

    http://azogcc.az.gov/sites/azogcc.az.gov/files/meetings/1965.04.28.PDF

    On page 12 it states only: "There has been considerable leasing activity in Pinal County, southeast of Florence. The leasing is being done by some of the people associated with Silas Newton (Sedona). It is rumored that this will be an attempt to recoup some of the losses from the Sedona venture."

    No documents here about Silas Newton being Bernerd Ray's boss either in 1965 or 1947. They were both in the same business (oil exploration), so MAYBE they knew one another, but they worked completely different oil regions. For over 40 years, Bernerd Ray lived in Midland, Texas and died there (1983), and to the best of my knowledge, never lived in Sedona.

    At some point, my understanding is that Hilda Ray divorced him and lived in Sedona (where the slides were found), but she died in her home state of Minnesota (1988). There was a 1989 obituary in the Sedona newspaper suggesting she probably lived there shortly before she died. Whether Hilda Ray was there in the same time period as Silas Newton, I don't know.

    I suppose I could also speculate wildly that it was actually Silas Newton who was the source of the slides and they were eventually passed on to Hilda Ray in Sedona. That would be a twist. Of course, I have absolutely zero evidence to support this scenario, just as Rich seems to have zero evidence to support that Newton was Bernerd Ray's boss in 1947 and saw the slides back then, hence dreamed up the Aztec crash.

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • Yes, that's the post, Ross.

    I think the document is online at our master web-site locale.

    I'll check to see if it's still there.

    I had a copy on our main computer surely but we lost the hard drive and that computer earlier this year.

    I have back-ups, a slew of them

    So it may take a while to find the original, but I'll look and reload it here when it's found.

    Maybe Senor Caravaca can provide another copy also.

    Why it's not linked is interesting.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • Thank you David...

    One speculates, and that's what ufology is all about.

    You're looking for definite proof about everything UFO related but haven't found it yet, so I understand your frustration with speculation.

    My "theorizing" brought me some material that, circumstantially, provides possibilities.

    That you, of all people, eschew speculations, surprises.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • Rich,

    I eschew speculation presented as actual fact, such as very specific statements by you that Newton was Ray's boss in 1947 (or Ray was a "working intimate" of Newton, as originally reported by you in May 2013).

    I would also like to see a source for your statement, "Frank Scully’s wife saw and reported upon the Ray photos..."

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • David:

    I'll see what I can dig up to satisfy your curiosity.

    In my original posts I usually have a link to source material.

    Later posts refer to the statements but don't contain the source links as I expect readers to have seen the first postings.

    The Scully wife statement was part of an elaborate posting, with reference links, about the son of Wilbert Smith who still has the photos.

    I suggested that someone (Bragalia?) try and contact younger Smith.

    I don't keep files in a special place that I post about but usally have them on a hard disk or archived at one of our web-sites.

    Looking for them when someone wants to see them is a chore I don't indulge in.

    I expect them to find the material online via a Google search.

    UFOs for me are a theoretical or speculative endeavor not a forensic activity.

    The topic is too silly for extra serious endeavors, of the kind you've chosen to partake of -- a matter I've addressed often about UFO mavens and their obsessive UFO habit which has ruined their lives or taken control of them to the detriment of their wives and family and their own life-style(s).

    You should find my original post about Scully's wife via Google by using Wilbert Smith in your search query.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • OK Rich, so I Google Mrs. Frank Sculley and Wilbert Smith and come up with:

    http://ufocon.blogspot.com/2013/06/aztec-is-roswell-photo-evidence.html

    In which you write:

    "And Alice Scully is reported to have seen photos of alien bodies (which she, like her husband, thought were from an the purported Aztec crash of 1948)."

    Still no reference. If Alice Scully said this, who reported it? Frank Scully never mentioned seeing photos of alien bodies in his book. Scott Ramsey doesn't mention this in his Aztec book. (All Scully has to say is that "Dr. G." told him that photos were taken using some sort of magic film that would quickly fade but could briefly be viewed again using the proper chemical.)

    Wilbert Smith and his son James are brought up in the same blog discussion (with links), but in the context of James Smith saying his father told him that he had been allowed to see a recovered saucer and alien bodies in 1952, but none of this was directly linked to Roswell, Aztec, or any photos.

    So does anyone have a reference that Alice or Frank Scully ever claimed to see photos of alien bodies?

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • David:

    I think I have the material about Mrs. Scully and Smith's ownership of the photos she saw somewhere here.

    We lost our main computer a month or so ago, but I have made back ups on portable hard dives and thumb drives.

    I'll see if I can locate the material I found about Smith's access to the photos....he owned them.

    The problem, for me, is that this stuff goes on a blog and doesn't have a place categorized as is the case with your web-site.

    You have everything in one place, stored where people can access it.

    We have a slew of web-sites but not set up like yours.

    So finding used material is a bit dicey, but I'll look.

    Usually a smart Google search will pull up one of my specific blog posts.

    Bragalia is really adept at finding his postings and references using Google.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014  

  • Rich.

    to be really honest, i have to agree with the Dr as i dont ever recall seeing the link which shows that Bernard worked for Silas either

    And ive checked Google and ive read the your pieces that have been mentioned.

    However it is possible ive just missed the post as i do believe you put it up.

    By Blogger Al12, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • AI12:

    The link is online here, provided by a comment.

    The document, however, is no longer available; it's link not working.

    I'll re-provide the document when I relocate it.

    Meanwhile read my post -- Ufological Speculation.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Rich

    Ok thanks, will do.

    By Blogger Al12, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

Post a Comment

<< Home