UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, February 22, 2015

The Kodachrome "being" -- where are its clothing?

The allleged alien, depicted in the controversial Kodachorme slides, is exhibited without apparel, or "space taveling gear."

Are we to suppose that extraterrestrial travelers, especially those witnessed, or exhibited as the Kodak slides being is, arrive on a strange planet, devoid of protection against weather or unknown biologic hazards as germs, radiation, et cetera?

That aside, why is the Kodak "being" provided without dress or clothing, or helmet or gloves -- apparel one would expect to be part of interplanetary travel, and exhibited if the glass enclosure is a showcase of some kind?

Was the supposed Roswell flying disc environmentally sound (equipped) to allow the crew naked presence, as they traveled the stars?

Something doesn't compute.



  • Why would you let a biological specimen desiccate if it's preservation has the aim of examining it?

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, February 22, 2015  

  • The question I would ask is why send a biological being at all?
    We are ourselves, use unmanned probes and UAVs to explore the unknown. So why would these "aliens" put themselves at great risk exploring earth?
    The beings themselves could simply be some sort of biological drones- used for exploring other worlds. No protection necessary, as they were designed specifically for this type of planet.
    Or, if we are to believe they truly crashed accidentally, maybe they weren't prepared in terms of protective gear.
    Although there have been a handful of reports that the beings were clothes in some sort of metallic garb.
    Too many unknowns to really make any kind of assessment.
    I still can't believe the hype with the slides. They really do not call for it. There is no link to Roswell, there is no link to it being "alien".

    By Blogger Daniel Hurd, at Sunday, February 22, 2015  

  • The links are the will to believe that these gaps are seamless when the evidence as a presentment contradicts this veracity.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, February 22, 2015  

  • Daniel,

    That's the "beauty" of this soon to be presentation. Dew, Carey, Schmitt (with the help of Maussan) are not required to prove anything, but merely to show the "possibilities" of it being alien and Roswell related.

    Similar to how correlation studies are formed.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Sunday, February 22, 2015  

  • Autopsy removal, clothes burnt in impact, clothing only a human trait, it's skin is its protective layer etc. The team have a whole host of reasons to give. I"ll ignore it being naked if they prove its an alien

    By Blogger Stephen Jackson, at Sunday, February 22, 2015  

  • Stephen is correct. Examination of a dead body is facilitated by removing the clothes. This is a non-issue.

    However, the genital area is in view. If a hi-res image shows a sexless humanoid, we'll know this is a doll from an old science project or Alien Autopsy 2.0.

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Monday, February 23, 2015  

  • Listen fellows..

    If this is an exhibit, one would think that any attendant accessories would be included: clothing, head gear, et cetera.

    You guys tend to stop thinking along the way.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, February 23, 2015  

  • I am in agreement with RR as to how any exhibit, public or secret, would tend towards completion of the collection.

    Yet, I seem to remember that in his "Kodachrome"-supporting short interview video, Adam Dew minion Tom Carey states that the "being"'s head was obviously separated from the body.

    If so, then all that we actually have here is a slide of a strange head laying next to strange body, NOT an intact creature of some kind.

    Ignoring the historical precedent for now of the Brontosaurus hoax that used the wrong skull intentionally, just how can anyone argue that upon finding a totally alien space crash, that "that there head goes with this here body"???

    (unless of course one assumes in 1947 that "The Three Stooges" Effect was the inspiration for ALL serious problem solving.)

    By Blogger Loki, at Monday, February 23, 2015  

  • Nothing 'computes" about these alleged slides.

    First, while the other slides from the collection are in perfect focus and exposure, the one slide I saw online was blurry and under-exposed.

    Second, the anatomical features are too vague, too poorly defined to be other than a rubber doll with a wire armature beneath. The figure reminds me of the Mattel alien toy "Callisto" which was produced in the late 60s and early 70s.

    Lastly, despite the claim that the film stock was from the period in question, with proper storage, any film stock can last for decades and still accept images. With today's more sophisticated techniques, it is fairly simple to expose old film stock and claim the images are from the period when the stock was first produced.

    These three items alone are enough to make people cry "foul", let alone the complicated back story where people are not named and dates are not given.

    Until a physical body is presented, these slides will remain firmly in the "hoax" category for me.

    By Blogger rroffel, at Tuesday, February 24, 2015  

Post a Comment

<< Home