UFO Conjecture(s)

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Ufological Speculation

The current issue of The New Yorker magazine [7/21/14], in Briefly Noted [Page 81] has this about writers who’ve written books, one about Freud and one about The Beat Generation.

In the paragraph about Becoming Freud by Adam Phillips (Yale), is this:

“Talking [Freud’s] admonishments about writing biographies, Phillips, a psychoanalyst himself,  attempts ‘a Freudian life of the young Freud.” The result is anti-biography. Phillips eschews scene setting, character sketches, and chronology, in favor of a string of musings on the first fifty or so years of Freud’s life.”

And this from the notation of American Smoke by Iain Sinclair (Faber) “ … the result is beguiling, full of sparkling prose and odd, unexpected detours … his trip is mostly a journey of the imagination.” [Italics mine]

This is what writers do. The conjure up the truth from associations and connections that spur their imaginations, causing a fictive work that approaches truth often more truthfully than a factual rendition of data and information that is gathered from disparate and controversial sources.

Great writing – Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, Joyce, et al. – is a product of imaginative speculation that harbors truths that facts often miss.

David Rudiak gathers facts and tries to allow those facts to bespeak truths that aren’t exactly there but seem to be – his Ramey speculations, for example. (His Ramey thesis is interesting and imaginative but shorn of proof. However, had he allowed his views to be speculative rather than a presentation of reality, his observations would have been more readily accepted by UFO cognoscenti.)

David bludgeons his followers with a treasure trove of information, but while less is more, for him, more is more and he provides a cascade of information that doesn’t gel in the imagination of his readers.

David writes, a lot, but he isn’t a writer.

He now is taking me to task for my speculative views on Bernerd Ray, Silas Newton, Roswell, and Aztec, pressing for proofs and “facts” that are just not available at this late date.

I’m left to speculate on what may be a truth that I imagine – Silas Newton was presented some photos of a Roswell incident that Bernerd Ray had captured on film; Silas Newton taking the story as a ploy for nefarious activity, creating an Aztec scenario, that he got Frank Scully, a writer/reporter, to see as an actual account – Skully’s imaginative faculties filling in the blanks that Newton’s tale were fraught with, and so we have Behind the Flying Saucers.

Speculation can get one in trouble sometimes and particularly when it comes to criminal investigations, if one isn’t careful.

But in ufology or cosmology or anything else, imaginative speculation is a doorway to truths, as Einstein found out as well as and, in particular, quantum physicists who discovered that when dealing with the evanescent aspects of quantum mechanics.

Theoretical physicists are prime examples of speculative thinkers (and writers).

One has to take what exists in the way of information and mold it to portray a truth that they see as possible – not true perhaps, in the factual sense, but true in another way: encompassing possibilities that could be real.

David Rudiak did this with his Ramey hypothesis, but his presentation is hammered too hard, causing readers of his foray to shy away. Mr. Rudiak is proselytizing, on behalf of his bias, that extraterrestrials exist, fly in UFOs or saucers, and crashed near Roswell in 1947.

It’s an acceptable view – to me.

But when I conjecture that Bernerd Ray and Silas Newton were in contact (or more), derived from their similar professions, locale, and circumstantial employment situation, Mr. Rudiak questions my speculation, as do Frank Warren and Scott Ramsey, all of whom think Aztec happened as Frank Scully told it.

But Aztec did not happen as Frank Scully had it. He was, unknown to him at the time, regurgitating the Roswell tale as reconfigured by Silas Newton (for the reasons I have enumerated earlier here).

David Rudiak can’t accept my speculation which has more grist than the vague blotches in his enlarged Ramey memo.

That’s okay with me. After all, as French UFO skeptic Gilles Fernandez often remind us, “That’s ufology.

UFOs and its pseudo-science are too silly or ephemeral to get worked up about.

Even the so-called Roswell slides are nothing to get worked up about: they will end up proving nothing, except that someone took photos of a strange thing, in an unknown place, at an unknown time.

But speculative writing about UFOs and its mimesis will continue here, and elsewhere I hope. It’s entertaining, and I would hope approaches truths that facts can’t emulate.

RR

23 Comments:

  • I have certainly had many arguments with Rudiak.

    He comes into the fight fully prepared and knows more facts about most UFO topics than anyone else.

    But he can't seem to limit himself to facts. In the typical double wall of Rudiakan text, a huge portion isn't factual but is conspiracy/UFO buff speculation.

    I submit that Rudiak isn't the most despicable kind of UFO believer (although he is terrible). It is those who read Rudiak's half facts and, because they have a faux-scientific veneer, accept them without hesitation, who are the real problem.

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Rich: "He now is taking me to task for my speculative views on Bernerd Ray, Silas Newton, Roswell, and Aztec, pressing for proofs and “facts” that are just not available at this late date."

    You wrote it was available. If you doubt it, do a google search.

    Thanks, David.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Don:

    The document and Smith's photos are available.

    I was referring to my total scenario: the Bernerd Ray display of slides to Newton, and his telling Newton about Roswell.

    I know you and others always want concrete materials from the time-frames in early UFO postings, but you know that such material is rarely available in 2014.

    Roswell materials, Rhodes material, Maury Island materials, et cetera are just not extant.

    But the Smith photos seem to be and the Bernerd Ray/Silas Newton connection also.

    For those interested beyond my speculation(s), I suggest they seek that stuff out.

    When I posted a link at UFO UpDates in 2005 to balloon flights at Socorro in 1964, readers wanted a specific flight, even though it was merely a matter of them checking my link (from Navy files) and seeing what was there, first hand.

    They didn't want to exert the effort.

    This is what is happening here.

    I've created a conjecture, not from whole cloth, but from detritus that seems to provide support for my conjecture.

    One can check that detritus out and see if there is substance to my imaginative view(s) or they can white-wash my speculation.

    That is what David wishes to do, as he thinks Aztec is real and separate from Roswell, also real, in his mind.

    I've provided, I think, enough grist to support my conjecture that Newton created Aztec, using Roswell as a template.

    You can find, as you note, all my posts about it via Google, if your search queries are refined and erudite.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Rich, really one can speculate without evidence to base it on. Happens constantly re ufos.

    Your speculation is that Ray showed the photos to Newton, but it is just as likely, without evidence in support, that Newton showed Ray the cadaver and the Ray's took some snaps of it.

    That speculation has nothing to support it, except maybe, since Newton was a con man and went to some effort to invent the Aztec hoax, that he might have had one of his Hollywood movie friends work up a cadaver.

    Or, he found it on one of his many digs in wastelands over the decades and kept it as a curiosity or as an entertainment for his friends. Kind of like a mummy unwrapping party in 19th century London.

    In other words, the speculation should delimit other immediate interpretations such as mine above.

    What must be supported by evidence at a minimum is 'directionality' Ray to Newton with enough evidence to disallow a Newton to Ray interpretation.

    Otherwise its just your opinion vs my opinion and that will get us nowhere fast.


    Best Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • "I've provided, I think, enough grist to support my conjecture that Newton created Aztec, using Roswell as a template."

    I do not believe there is, or was, any connection between Aztec and Roswell.

    I also do not believe that you have ever demonstrated, with any real evidence, that Newton created Aztec using Roswell as a template.

    I further put it to you that Newton had never heard of Roswell when he 'created' Aztec. Can you please provide some evidence, not just conjecture, that he had:

    1. Heard of Roswell at all.
    2. Created Aztec by using Roswell as a blueprint, or template.

    You realise that for Newton to have used Roswell as a template he must have either spoken to some of the witnesses or, failing that, got the story from the newspapers. Did he do either of these? Remember that with Roswell the press accounts do NOT mention bodies being found or in fact anything at all beyond scraps of tinfoil, sticks and rubber. So from whom did Newton learn about the alleged bodies, etc?

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • What gives my conjecture legs, I think, Don, is that Roswell has supporting evidence for an event.

    Aztec has none, other than Scully's book, which came from Newton (and GeBauer).

    The photos would come from Rowell, not from a fictive Aztec.

    While it's speculation, it has to have some logic involved, and sensible rumination.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • CDA:

    I'm saying that Ray gave Newton the Roswell story, basing my suggestion on Ray having been near Roswell, and grabbing his photos (the slides).

    I accept that scenario as a real possibility, knowing what I know about the slides story, much of which hasn't appeared online yet.

    I have been privy to some information that allows my conjecture.

    At this time, you are right. I have no proof -- just circumstantial speculation.

    But I think my view(s) will be confirmed, even if the slides don't definitively establish an ET presence at Roswell in 1947.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • And this:

    My posting was encouraging you fellows to use your imaginations, creatively (as my New Yorker excerpts suggested).

    God, what a boring clot of guys I've ended up with here.

    Our private UFO web-site -- which has no UFO people involved -- none! -- only professionals and college students who provide refreshing and innovative thought about the UFO phenomenon -- excites with thinking and ideas that are creative in the extreme.

    Here, I get stuffy, staid ideas and the same old, same old comments, devoid of imaginative thinking or anything new.

    No wonder people like Bruce Duensing and Joel Crook are loath to participate.

    Sheesh!

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • The sad part when people get all serious about the Aztec tale is that something much more interesting gets lost in the deadly dull shuffle - the fact that Aztec is a great story. It just doesn't have anything to do with space aliens. But as a wonderfully twisted piece of Americana it's pure gold. I'm surprised it hasn't been turned into a feature film yet, as a Grifters sort of thing.

    PK

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Indeed, Paul...

    It's a terrific fiction, but the ET crowd wants to think it's a real event, and dowsing their delusional enthusiasm is harder than one can imagine.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • The ET crowd thinks everything is an ET event, Rich. It's as bad as the schmucks in the Dark Ages who ascribed everything to God (or the gods). What ufology needs - but will never get - is an Enlightenment. Ahh... the irony.

    PK

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • The devolution of mankind, especially amongst the UFO clan is too far along for any shred of enlightenment.

    They are doomed, and we along with them perhaps.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • They are doomed, and we along with them perhaps.

    Speak for yourself, Rich... as long as I have HBO and Bergman films I'll be fine. :-)

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • I'll be clutching my Bach albums when I go down.....and they are taking me with them I'm afraid.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Paul: "The sad part when people get all serious about the Aztec tale is that something much more interesting gets lost in the deadly dull shuffle - the fact that Aztec is a great story. It just doesn't have anything to do with space aliens. But as a wonderfully twisted piece of Americana it's pure gold. I'm surprised it hasn't been turned into a feature film yet, as a Grifters sort of thing."

    I agree it is a great story and also that 'Aztec' didn't happen.

    My study of the saucers isn't ufo-oriented. It is to find connections between a ufo case and historical (and non-ufo) events. This is similar to what Tony Bragalia has attempted with his research into the development of Nitinol (whether his analysis or interpretation is accurate isn't my point).

    Regarding Aztec, or rather, Scully's book (I haven't read Ramsey or any other ufo books about it) and Newton and the people involved with him. I can trace links to the HUAC investigation of Hollywood, and also events in Persia regarding oil in the early '50s, and it's a great story, too.

    I'd recommend being less flippant about it and to move on from the insular ufo world stage, which even skeptics
    occupy, out into the daylight. It is your choice to spend your time in a vampire's crypt, not mine.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • From a skeptical point of view why stop an opponent from cutting his throat (philosophically speaking)? We can only hope that he makes a clean cut for his sake...

    Its a numbers game in the end. The ET crowd possesses the numbers, thus the strategic high ground. It has always been, thus it will probably remain for the foreseeable future.

    It doesn't bother me, yet it does amaze me to a certain extent.

    Bach, Bergman and HBO? I'll rely on my complete collection of Creedence Clearwater. Fogerty still sings the blues to me after all these decades...

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Tim...

    You are such a proletariat, not a plebian, thankfully.

    I hate(d) Creedence Cleawater; the voices make my teeth hurt.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Rich should volunteer his latest missive as a perfect example of total bullshit that Kevin Randle latest blog is about (in reference to the Air Force and Project Blue Book, but Rich would fit in nicely).

    Let's get back to what REALLY happened here. Rich went well beyond mere speculation to making very specific claims (which if true would be important factoids about both Roswell and Aztec, which is why I pressed the matter), to whit:

    1) Silas Newton (of Aztec infamy) was IN FACT oil geologist Bernerd Ray's boss shortly after Roswell and they were "intimates", I suppose meaning friends or good buddies (or maybe something else). This was the basis for his actual speculation that Ray showed Newton his alien body slides and Newton used this to create his Aztec hoax, but it was all based on the two allegedly knowing one another quite well, even having a boss/employee relationship.

    2) In addition, Rich claimed Alice Scully, wife of Frank Scully, author of "Behind the Flying Saucers” had also seen alien photos, allegedly from Canadian Wilbert Smith, this information allegedly coming from Smith's son James. Further, these alleged photos may have been Bernerd Ray's slides.

    Thus two specific claims NOT presented as speculation: Newton was Ray's boss and Mrs. Scully was shown alien photos by Wilbert Smith.

    So foolish me, I asked Rich to provide actual references for these claims. (I wasn't the only one, e.g. Tony Bragalia had previously asked Rich to back up his claim that Newton was Ray's boss.)

    So Rich pulled his usual: you can Google it or look it up on my previous so-and-so blog where I covered this and provided references.

    In one case Rich’s prior blog did provide links to a 1965 document (the links now broken) that in the blog Rich claimed proved Newton was Ray's boss. I Googled and finally found the document. It did briefly mention Newton, but all it said was that Newton lived in Sedona, AZ, and that he and associates (no one specifically mentioned) were doing a lot of oil exploration in the area trying to recoup losses.

    So absolutely nothing about Newton being Ray's boss, and this was 1965 anyway, for Crissakes, not 1947, when Rich claimed the bossy relationship was created and Ray showed him the slides. At best, Ray’s wife Hilda, whom he divorced, toward the end of her life lived in Sedona (where the slides were found in her possessions), so it is conceivable there was interaction between Newton and Hilda Ray, but still much too late to have anything to do with Newton, Scully, and Aztec back in 1949 and 1950. Bernerd Ray himself never lived in Sedona, living, working, and dying in Midland, TX.

    As for Wilbert and James Smith, all that was said was James reported that his father told him towards the end of his life of being shown alien bodies and a crashed saucer by the U.S. government. This is all true--James Smith did say that--but what does it have to do with Alice Scully allegedly saying she and her husband had been shown alien photos by Wilbert Smith? Again, nothing to back up the claim.

    When I pointed out that none of this supported Rich's specific claims, he claimed his computer had crashed recently (the dog ate his homework), but fear not, it was all backed up and he would provide the references.

    Two microseconds later he instead wrote the new blog trying to make me into the villain of the piece, somehow not appreciating good speculation and imaginative writing and instead I was "bludgeoning" readers with those annoying things called facts. (This is what Rich calls his “grist”.)

    I'm still waiting for Rich's promised references that Silas Newton was Bernerd Ray's boss and someone reported Alice Scully saying Wilbert Smith had shown the Scully's alien photos. (And waiting, and waiting, forever waiting...)

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Thank you David...

    You know I luv ya, regardless.

    My posting (above) was to point out that speculation is not an evil thing but a creative thing.

    I wasn't slamming your approach but I was implying that you speculate (your Ramey hypothesis) and when I speculate, you get irritated that I don't produce the smoking guns that support my speculating.

    I'm being creative, not providing a forensic account of what actually happened between Ray, Newton, Hilda, Jim Smith, or anyone else.

    It's a suggestion.

    I have been trying to drag Frank Warren into this as he has something to say about Ray and Newton, but Frank, wisely?, demurs.

    I have other fish to fry so finding past postings and comments is annoying for me, as I don't have those things sited in one place, as you do.

    You are obsessive. I'm not.

    And I wasn't making you out to be a villain about all this.

    I'm merely pointing out that your approach to the UFO topic is nuts, mine isn't.

    I'll have more about all this, as I've already stated in a few comments here.

    You'll just have to wait, as the rest of us are waiting for the slides to appear.

    Don't take my posting here personally.

    You are not a villain.

    You just a guy who doesn't know what writing and speculation are, among literati.

    Paul Kimball gets it, as do Duensing, Crook, Moody, and others.

    Keep up the good work; you are a gatherer of valuable material.

    Me? I'm just a humble UFO hobbyist, suggesting things that may be, rather than trying to say what things are -- like "victims" in the Ramey memo.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Let's clear up some more of Rich's bullshit claims:

    RICH: That is what David wishes to do, as he thinks Aztec is real and separate from Roswell, also real, in his mind.

    This is Rich making claims on my behalf that I have never made. (He often does this.) In fact, I have NEVER stated I thought Aztec was real. I consider it a very weak case.

    Go back only yesterday (July 16) to the comments on Rich's blog "The Aztec/Roswell Bodies? (Support for the Roswell slides?)" and you will see again my asking Rich for evidence that Silas Newton was Bernerd Ray's boss, then adding that Newton had been involved trying to promote another crashed saucer hoax only a few weeks before he hooked Frank Scully with Aztec, this time an alleged crash in the Mojave Desert near Death Valley, supposedly in July 1949:

    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'... 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)


    I think I made my opinion of Newton pretty clear there: a transparent hoax and classic conman stuff from Newton, such as the various aliases and changes of story.

    MORE RICH: When I posted a link at UFO UpDates in 2005 to balloon flights at Socorro in 1964, readers wanted a specific flight, even though it was merely a matter of them checking my link (from Navy files) and seeing what was there, first hand.

    Yes, the absolute audacity of readers actually wanting a specific reference, instead of being told it was somewhere amongst hundreds of papers they were supposed to search through for themselves.

    I am very glad Rich brought this up, because he is pulling the same stunt again--promising references to back up his claims that somehow he never provides, instead tells the readers to go Google themselves and find the references on their own. (In this instance, Rich was making a claim of fact that his imaginary paper documented that a Navy balloon was responsible for Socorro.)

    In any sort of academic publication (such as a peer-reviewed journal), nobody would ever accept Rich's utter BULLSHIT that it was the reader's responsibility to document the writer's claims. That's why academic papers or scholarly books (histories, biographies, etc.) have lengthy lists of very SPECIFIC references documenting specific claims of fact made within.

    No Rich, you make the claims, it is YOUR responsibility to provide the specific references. Where are your references for your claims of fact that Silas Newton was Bernerd Ray's boss (and knew each other extremely well) or that the Frank Scully's were show alien photos by Wilbert Smith?

    You have promised that these exist, but somehow you just never produce, do you? Instead you try to change the subject to me being some bad guy for asking.

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • See my previous reply. And to keep using the word "bullshit" here takes us into Randle blogging procedure. I.hate that.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • What you should hate Rich is not use of the word "bullshit", but a former self-described newspaper reporter repeatedly making various claims of fact and further repeatedly claiming to be able to actually document them, then being unable to document them (but still promising he will), then admitting he was being "creative" with his "facts" for amusement sake (since the subject matter can't be taken seriously anyway and anybody wanting actual facts is somehow "nuts") and is now too busy to look up his alleged steenking references (which doesn't matter because they don't support what he was claiming to begin with).

    In other words, not an attempt at actual serious investigative reporting (which would be welcome), but little more than a cheap high school creative writing exercise masquerading as a term paper, complete with phony references.

    This from a self-described former reporter always crying crocodile tears on his blogs about how Ufology is all messed up by those "UFO mavens" who don't know how to conduct proper investigations. Apparently this is how he believes you conduct a proper investigation.

    It sounds positively Newtonian in its sheer chutzpah and dissembling nature.

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • David:

    See my new posting.

    My original take on Aztec/Roswell has the material and links that support my conjecture.

    You found one yourself.

    That material provides what I call "grist" for my speculation.

    I know you want more but speculations often (usually) can't provide more, but one can try to get their hands on material that bolsters their premise or conjecture.

    For me, Aztec and Roswell are not germane enough to the UFO phenomenon to warrant excessive searches supporting materials about a UFO fiction.

    I know you see it otherwise but you fall into that category of UFO mavens I've chastised here (and elsewhere) for filling their lives with UFO detritus to the detriment of other, more pratical, sensible things.

    You can find all my comments about Aztec/Roswell online via Google.

    I think a person who wants to see what makes up my suggestions should seek out initial suggestions rather than take my word for what I've written in the past.

    You discard my remarks about what I've written about the matter over the past few years, so find that original material and those postings to get your hands on what I offered (then) to come up with my speculation.

    UFOs are an iffy proposition for me, as those who've read here for a while can guess.

    I know UFOs and Roswell are serious topics for you, obsessively so, as one can see from your onslaughts when anyone challenges the ETH.

    Take my speculation for what it is.

    Debunk it with something other than "Rich's dog ate Rich's homework" and we'll have something.

    Don't give me or us another scenario.

    Deal with mine and prove it's wrong, with your own factual finds.

    I've made my statements about Aztec and Roswell.

    I stick with them, as a possibility.

    You need to squelch them with something more than broadsides about how you can't find my initial or supporting postings.

    Come on...you can do it.

    Me? I have other things to so, like sort my sock drawer.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

Post a Comment

<< Home