UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Ufology’s Academic Mistake(s)

David Rudiak is irked by my approach to the Aztec and Roswell stories.

Let me explain so that even he understands what I’m doing…

Aztec is, for me, a fiction. I tackle it as a fiction.

Roswell has become mythic. One should deal with the 1947 event as a myth, using the academic methodologies for mythology.

George Adamski’s tales are a contrivance (created for reasons not quite clear, but concocted surely). One should treat Adamski and his contacts as part of a self-generated creation.

Many of the UFO accounts provided here and at his blog-site by Jose Antonio Caravaca are delusions, and should be treated with psychological methodologies.

Mr. Rudiak sees Roswell as a substantive 1947 event and treats it forensically, which is admirable, in an odd way.

French UFO skeptic Gilles Fernandez, Lance Moody, and CDA (perhaps) see Roswell as a myth, developed by Stanton Friedman’s 1978 intrusion and developing as a mythos until today (2104).

To deal or treat Roswell as something other than a mythos grates the skeptics.

Treating Aztec as a real event, with real chronologies, data, and facts, when it is a fiction, created by Silas Newton and exacerbated, unknowingly as a real event, by Frank Scully, would be foolish.

To try and obtain factual material for a fictive event or story would be stupid on the face of it.

One can gather supportive materials that underlie a fiction, but to take that supportive material into a realm of reportage and fact would be a nonsensical activity.

Mr. Rudiak doesn’t get what premises my speculation, even though I gave him and readers here a heads up with the two New Yorker excerpts in the posting preceding this one.

I like Mr. Rudiak. I think he has accumulated much about Roswell and UFOs generally that is valuable.

But he isn’t academic in his approach. He misses the nuances of speculation. He’s a tyro when it comes to how writers work, what they are trying to do, what truths they are trying to determine using something other than concrete facts or data.

When I say Aztec derives from Roswell, that seems, to me, to follow from the time-line, the persons involved, and the details that intersect between Aztec and Roswell: downed flying saucers, with bodies and a military cover-up.

Mr. Rudiak wants more. He wants me to concretize a fiction.

I’d like to accommodate him, but his obsession is not mine and I’m not going to chase that dog’s tail, just to assuage his obsession with the ETH.



  • I've presented several posts the past few years about Aztec/Roswell.

    I've addded current addenda.

    David Rudiak would have me resplurge on postings regurgitating my original stuff, something he likes to do with his own writings; that is, he would like me to join him in his obsessive UFO dialogues.

    I'm not going to do it.

    He can find my original posts and re-read the addenda added here the past few days.

    That should help him understand my approach, which he mocks because he's not a writer or person inclined to academic debate.

    He prefers the argot of the slums, and venues where sleazy thought and non-intellectual debate thrive.

    Not here, David....sorry.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Rich,

    The problem with believing "Mythologies" wholeheartedly is that it can have real or unintended consequences .

    As an example, take the Catholic Inquisition of the Medieval period. There were several but they all operated in the same manner and to the same ends using the same mythography and hysteria. Innocents were murdered for a mistaken belief. When one Inquisitor was asked about killing heretics, he gave the famous answer, "Kill them all. The Lord will know his own!".

    Both the believers and skeptics have that kind of "carried away" sort of belief "absolutism" which prevents them from seeing anything other than their own chosen view point.

    "It must be!" "That's false!" "The Government is lying!" The Government is telling the truth!" "They are insane or deluded!" "It's fiction!" "It's the Truth!"

    The conclusions of the skeptics and the believers have already been drawn before they write or say their first word so the net result is they select their facts to suit their preconceived conclusions.

    Giles or David or any of the others of either camp are unlikely to ever believe anything different than what they already believe. Their only hope is to one day be able to say "I told you so." I have a feeling that will be a long wait.

    For some none of these "unusual" events occurred. For others all of them have occurred. For still others the question is open to reasoned debate. Give me a group of reasonable minds who are open to accepting observations, measurements, and who are willing to do real science any old time.

    I think this is the problem my father ran up against. Most of those "in the field" during his involvement had a preconceived agenda and there were very few who he encountered who could stand the uncertainty of not having a "final answer". Science can work with uncertainty... believers [regardless of their cloth] cannot.

    My father was wise enough to keep his religion and his science separated... most of the believers and skeptics fail to do this which results in "witch hunts" or "wizard's duels".

    By Blogger Joel Crook, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Rich: "Let me explain so that even he understands what I’m doing…
    Aztec is, for me, a fiction. I tackle it as a fiction.
    Roswell has become mythic. One should deal with the 1947 event as a myth, using the academic methodologies for mythology."

    No matter Roswell or Aztec are "myths" or "fictions", the people weren't. They were actually existing people. Factual as factual as can be. Their lives were real, not a myth or a fiction. If the ufo part of their lives became a fiction or myth, it wasn't so for them. By avoiding the reality of them we create a myth or fiction using them as cartoon cutouts we move about on the white board of our mythmaking.

    Your "approach" ignores the real and opts for the myth. My word for it wouldn't be "bullshit".

    Best Regards,


    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • It is the crux of presumption as well as the upside down faith that what this is about can be defined either by linear causality or attaching similarities upon something that has proven to be incommensurable to any given theory, whether it involves conspiracies or positivist belief systems pro and con. There is enough ample evidence in the aggregate sum that no one has and no one will ever explain any of this in a coherent manner.
    I could provide a list of many such examples outside of this subject that are evidence of this subject not being the only case wherein a definitive answer or answers are unlikely to be determined in our lifetime. Whats missing is humility and a sense of humor in all this. Its like an ingrown toenail or a neurosis. In some ways, if it is taken too far it becomes a sickness...there is a toxic side to all this and there is ample evidence that this is so. We we do know is that we do not know and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded to the point of abstracted apoplexy.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Thursday, July 17, 2014  

  • Rich:

    I was really interested in the mentioned connection between Newton and Ray, and the implication to Aztec case was promising. Too bad it was speculation.

    By Blogger Don Maor, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Don M:

    It has to be speculation.

    There is no smoking gun, as there are no smoking guns in any (or most) UFO events.

    That there are hints of a connection means that those interested, such as yourself, should take what I have found and see if there are things that can flesh out the story of my speculation.

    Although material or data from the time-frame might be hard to find, it can be done, as Rudiak has shown.

    Moreover, I think once the slides story unfolds, there will be some information that might help shore up the Aztec/Roswell connection.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • (part 1 of 2)
    Well, here we go again. As Rich very well knows, the argument here wasn't whether Aztec was real or whether there was an Aztec/Roswell connection. Nobody was demanding “smoking gun” proof for Aztec. What a bunch of hooey and a typical Rich diversion from what really happened!

    No, this was about Rich making statements of fact, not mere speculation, also claiming he could document them, then it turns out to be a total sham. Rich finally admits he made up the whole thing, then tries to spin it into speculation, and won't admit he also made up his claims of supporting documentation, which he again promised only a few days ago to provide.

    The main piece of confabulation was Rich claiming oilman Silas Newton, primary instigator of the Aztec tale, was both "boss" and a "business intimate" of Midland, Texas oil geologist Bernerd Ray, husband of attorney Hilda Ray, in whose house the now infamous "Roswell slides" of a purported alien body were found in Sedona, Arizona, after her death.

    Rich claimed this association between Newton and Ray, including Ray showing Newton the "Roswell slides", is what eventually gave Newton the idea for Aztec. The latter was presented as true speculation, but not the association between Newton and Ray. That was presented as well-established fact. Rich even went so far as to say “others” had found this out as well, including Spanish researcher Jose Caravaca, who had sent him a document proving the connection (more in a moment). Rich began beating this drum a year ago:


    That geologist went to work of [for] Silas Newton, to whom he showed the photos and who either concocted the questionable fraud scheme he and Leo GeBauer were indicted for, using Aztec as the site of the photos or who created the Aztec story as a deflection from Roswell, at the insistence of the Air Force with whom he had collaborations.”

    Anthony Bragalia, who has actually researched Ray’s background, commented, “I completely disavow any knowledge that "Aztec is Roswell" or that I -or anyone- discovered that someone went to work for Silas Newton. Simply not true- and there is not a shred of evidence for any of this. I do not believe in the Aztec crash, period and RR knows this.”

    Six months later, Rich repeated and elaborated on his, uh, “speculation”:


    “During a review of the slides-finding, I (and others) discovered that Bernerd Ray went to work with Silas Newton shortly after 1947, during which, I suggest, he showed the slides to Newton (and Frank Scully’s wife) from which the Aztec story evolved, although the slides were taken of an incident in Roswell: the 1947 Roswell event that was covered up by the U.S. Army.”

    Note, not only did Rich himself say he “discovered” this (not “speculated”, not “conjectured”, but actually “discovered”, meaning to uncover as a fact) while looking into the slides, multiple “others” “discovered” this as well. To support this, Rich said,

    “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... Señor Caravaca provides the material to bolster my conjecture that Aztec is really Roswell...”

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • (part 2 of 2):
    The links to Caravaca’s document in the blog were broken then and now, but I refound the document (see p. 12): http://azogcc.az.gov/sites/azogcc.az.gov/files/meetings/1965.04.28.PDF

    So the document was real, but the contents do NOT match Rich’s claims. It merely says Silas Newton was engaged in oil exploration in 1965 around Sedona, absolutely nothing to suggest anything about “Bernerd Ray went to work with Silas Newton shortly after 1947”, nothing about the Rays at all, nothing about photos, nothing about Aztec. The only remote possible connection might be that Hilda Ray lived in Sedona towards the end of her life, but again no explicit connection between Newton or the Rays. And even assuming Newton knew Hilda Ray in 1965 in Sedona, what could this possibly have to with 19-fricking-49 when Newton first told the Aztec tale to Frank Scully or Bernerd Ray allegedly working for Newton back then?

    Tony Bragalia in comments AGAIN asked Rich for evidence to support the claim:

    “ Please do tell: What evidence exists that Bernerd Ray worked for Silas Newton? I would love to see details on this and will of course credit you if this information is incorporated into a public narrative on the slides. I have no evidence that Ray even knew Newton...”

    To which we got Rich’s usual BS evasive response about how he already covered that and go look it up yourself dude:

    “I provided that information in a posting (two postings actually) last year. Do I need to dredge it up for you? (I know you want to cement Ray to Roswell, and his connection to Newton doesn't destroy that connection, but Ray/Newton does explain how Aztec came about.)”

    Notice Rich AGAIN stating that Ray had a definite “connection” to Newton, again NOT presented as speculation but as fact.

    So Rich has been making very definitive claims that Ray worked for Newton for over a year, even claimed multiple “others” discovered this as well, and has ducked all inquiries asking him to document this, instead citing a document that has nothing to do with this. Now he’s claiming he never made such claims and it was all speculation from the beginning and I just don’t get it. Now (ha, ha) he’s being “academic” in his approach and I’m not. (In Richellian DoubleSpeak, “academic” apparently means writing pure fiction while presenting some of it as fact, which I suspect isn’t what 99.999% of actual academics would consider to be “academic debate”, i.e. well-documented research to uncover actual data and facts which might then be open to interpretation and debate.)

    But go read what Rich wrote for yourself over the past year. Unlike Rich, I’m not making this up.

    I won’t even go into another of Rich’s assertions as fact, that Newton (or was it Wilbert Smith?—he has said both) showed Mrs. Frank Scully the slides (or some other alien photos) as well, again seemingly pure confabulation on his part, again presented as fact, NOT speculation, and, of course, zero documentation.

    By Blogger David Rudiak, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • David:

    I said my conclusion and thesis were speculative, based upon the shreds of "evidence" presented, some of which you have highlighted.

    I've made a conjecture, sort of like you've done with the Ramey memo.

    And you hate my conjecture, because it has the ring of possibility.

    We'll see who ends up being on
    target, soon....


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Oh, and David...

    A recent missive to me from Anthony Bragalia is not as dismissive of my Aztec/Roswell conjecture as you state.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

Post a Comment

<< Home