Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 172

Thread: The Roswell Slides

  1. #21
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    8,218
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee View Post
    Anthony Bragalia has just posted a new article on this topic, additional information has been provided including the name of the Geologist - who it is presumed took the pictures - the name of his wife, who recently passed away and left the box of slides within her estate. According to the article these potentialy earth shattering images will soon be released to the public.

    http://ufocon.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11...swell.html?m=1

    (Note: This article contains a strong copyright, please do not repost without permission. )
    @Lee. Thanks for the link.
    Nice reply/comments you posted up on their website.
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  2. #22
    Administrator Lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North West, UK
    Posts
    1,312
    Thanks, Cali! Some of the comments on there are very cynical and negative in their scepticism.

    In the interest of independent verification, I found the following:

    Articles from Bernerd A. Ray:

    1.Developments in West Texas and Southeastern New Mexico in 1942
    http://archives.datapages.com/data/b...horStrip%3Aray

    2. West Texas and Southeastern New Mexico Development in 1941: ABSTRACT
    http://archives.datapages.com/data/b...horStrip%3Aray

    Obituary for Mrs Hilda Blair Ray, 14th June, 1989: (unfortunately, this link does not contain the actual Obituary just a reference).
    http://www.genealogybuff.com/ucd/web...rames/read/195

    Also several references for Mrs Hilda Blair Ray and her spouse Bernerd A. Ray:
    http://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/s...gss=seo&ghc=20

    So, we can at least say with confidence that the alleged photographer and his wife were indeed real people, that Bernerd Ray may well have been in the New Mexico area in 1947 and that they left an estate without any heirs.

    Combine this with the existance of dateable kodachrome slides and this story becomes more plausible by the day. The question now is, when will we see these images and what exactly do they depict? With luck, time will tell.
    The OutPost Forum - "Breaking the Boundaries of Science, Exploring the Frontier of Understanding"

  3. #23
    Administrator Lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North West, UK
    Posts
    1,312
    From the SOM1-01:



    Could this be the entity type depicted in the kodachrome slides...?
    The OutPost Forum - "Breaking the Boundaries of Science, Exploring the Frontier of Understanding"

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee View Post
    From the SOM1-01:



    Could this be the entity type depicted in the kodachrome slides...?
    Perhaps a Grey out of uniform / protective body wear.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee View Post
    From the SOM1-01:



    Could this be the entity type depicted in the kodachrome slides...?

    Maybe the same beings like this one, on this photo:

    ufo-roswell-121a.jpg

    Source of the photo is: http://science.howstuffworks.com/spa...-incident2.htm


    Note: But this is not the Marina Popowich Puppet from Montreal, Kanada - Photos: http://www.universonline.it/_misteri...i/00_03_17.php and http://www.slimeworld.org/strange/graphics/alien21.jpg

    Its similar but look at the differences at the mouth and the right eye (on "my" the eye on the left side) It seems as if were the eye damaged on "my" photo.

  6. #26
    Administrator Lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North West, UK
    Posts
    1,312
    Quote Originally Posted by CasperParks View Post
    Perhaps a Grey out of uniform / protective body wear.
    Actually if you read the SOM1-01 there are two distinct EBE types described. EBE-2 is a classic grey whereas the type above is more consistant with Roswell witness testimony.
    The OutPost Forum - "Breaking the Boundaries of Science, Exploring the Frontier of Understanding"

  7. #27
    Administrator Lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North West, UK
    Posts
    1,312
    Quote Originally Posted by Loengard View Post
    Maybe the same beings like this one, on this photo:

    ufo-roswell-121a.jpg

    Source of the photo is: http://science.howstuffworks.com/spa...-incident2.htm


    Note: But this is not the Marina Popowich Puppet from Montreal, Kanada - Photos: http://www.universonline.it/_misteri...i/00_03_17.php and http://www.slimeworld.org/strange/graphics/alien21.jpg

    Its similar but look at the differences at the mouth and the right eye (on "my" the eye on the left side) It seems as if were the eye damaged on "my" photo.
    Welcome to the forum, Loengard!

    I don't know much about the picture you posted, but I agree that it is consistant with the description from SOM1-01. It does also look different from the puppet you mention, most noticeably the mouth.
    The OutPost Forum - "Breaking the Boundaries of Science, Exploring the Frontier of Understanding"

  8. #28
    Senior Member majicbar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Minneapolis. Minnesota
    Posts
    1,192
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee View Post
    Actually if you read the SOM1-01 there are two distinct EBE types described. EBE-2 is a classic grey whereas the type above is more consistant with Roswell witness testimony.
    Don't forget that SOM-1 is dated April of 1954. Two primary types in 1954 were likely supplanted by a broader range of alien types, but from what I recall of close encounter type 4 reports these two seem to be those most commonly encountered up though today. Given the stress of witnesses in such encounters, we might be lumping together distinctly separate species, and even then some of them may be androids of various types.

  9. #29
    Administrator Lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North West, UK
    Posts
    1,312
    Quote Originally Posted by majicbar View Post
    Don't forget that SOM-1 is dated April of 1954. Two primary types in 1954 were likely supplanted by a broader range of alien types, but from what I recall of close encounter type 4 reports these two seem to be those most commonly encountered up though today. Given the stress of witnesses in such encounters, we might be lumping together distinctly separate species, and even then some of them may be androids of various types.
    I wouldn't disagree, just pointing out to Casper that there are two EBE types in the SOM in case he hadn't read it.

    Any thoughts on the slides? Or at least the back story as we haven't seen them yet.
    The OutPost Forum - "Breaking the Boundaries of Science, Exploring the Frontier of Understanding"

  10. #30
    Nice work, Lee!

    Majicbar, I think you are correct that the 1954 typology was probably superseded by newer information, I've always had a sense that the 1954 information might be closer to the truth than later information that has been distorted or diluted by some disinformation agenda. A lot of different bits of information go into that "sense" and I freely admit it is nothing more than informed speculation on my part.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •