Was the Alien Autopsy real after all?

AlienView

Noble
From: "International Business Times"
By Inigo Monzon 07/04/19 AT 5:40 AM

CIA Scientist Admits ‘Fake’ Roswell Alien Autopsy Video Is Real In Leaked Memo

"A
year after a filmmaker admitted that he faked the infamous “Roswell Alien Autopsy” video, a leaked memo revealed that a scientist from the CIA confirmed that the contents of the footage were actually real. The scientist noted that the alien cadaver featured in the video was authentic.

The original alien autopsy video was obtained by British businessman Ray Santilli in 1992. He got it from a retired U.S. military cameraman while looking for archive footages of Elvis Presley. Shortly after, Santilli sold the clip to various TV stations, which then sparked a public frenzy regarding the existence of aliens.

Although the footage has been regarded by UFO enthusiasts as the definitive proof of extraterrestrial beings, its authenticity was debunked in 2018 after filmmaker Spyros Melaris came forward to confess that he directed and produced the video.

According to Melaris, the footage was shot at a house in North London. He admitted that he used animal organs and a foam sculpture of an alien for the cadaver.

Even though the video was already debunked, new information suggested that it was actually real according to a leaked memo sent by physicist Eric Davis of the National Institute for Discovery Science to the organization’s founder Robert Bigelow.

The Sun, which was able to obtain photos of the memo, the document was leaked via email to British UFO investigator Philip Mantle. It was believed to have originated from the archives of former NASA astronaut and ufologist Edgar Mitchell.

The memo, which was sent on March 23, 2001, focused on the professional evaluation of the “Roswell Alien Autopsy” video by a CIA scientist known as Kit Green........"

See whole article here:
CIA Scientist Admits ‘Fake’ Roswell Alien Autopsy Video Is Real In Leaked Memo

I saw it once years ago when it was first broadcast publicly - I wasn't impressed.

Watched it again on YouTube tonight - I'm still not impressed.

It looks too much like the image of an alien you might see in a B grade science fiction movie.

But if you want to believe aliens are real, are abducting people, etc., then yes it is similar to the image
of what some aliens are supposed to look like when described by some abductees.

You would think that if it is definitely a fake, some tech orientated analysts could enlarge it and prove
without a reasonable doubt, after analysis that it is a fake.

= Has this been done ???
 

AlienView

Noble
This quoted article makes up my mind - Its fake:

"...........
Medical authorities argue that the autopsy itself was sloppily done. There was no systematic, careful study of the subject, but a "hack and slash." They point out that an alien would not be subject to an autopsy, anyway, but given the rare and unprecedented opportunity of studying the alien, a careful dissection and microscopic study, that might have taken weeks, would have been done.

Finally, some of the best evidence against the film is the film itself. According to Santilli the cameraman was with the military. Military cameramen are trained to carefully record events, like autopsies, in a prescribed way. Standard procedure for an important autopsy would include two cameras. One mounted above the table looking down, and one on a stationary, raised tripod in a location where there would be a clear view of the proceedings. The cameraman's style (shifting positions, getting his view blocked, climbing around and over the medical workers) would have gotten him, according to one former military officer, "back scrubbing pots in the kitchen."

It appears that the cameraman may have been purposely obscuring the proceedings to hide defects in the hoax. Experts also indicate that for such an important event as this color, not black and white, film would have been used. Also a "still" photographer would work hand-in-hand with the motion photographer to record every step of the procedure. There is no record in the film of another photographer in the room, nor the tell-tale light from his flash bulbs.

The film itself also lacks the "flash" that usually appears at the beginning of each segment. All spring-wound cameras of that time start up slowly and overexpose the first few frames after the trigger is pressed. This indicates either a more sophisticated motor driven camera was used instead of what was claimed, or the film has been edited.

It also seems incredible that a top-secret film like this would not have been collected from the photographer immediately after it had been shot. Cameramen given top-secret assignments in the military were not allowed to develop their own film........."

See whole article here:
The UnMuseum - Alien Autopsy Film
 
This quoted article makes up my mind - Its fake:

"...........
Medical authorities argue that the autopsy itself was sloppily done. There was no systematic, careful study of the subject, but a "hack and slash." They point out that an alien would not be subject to an autopsy, anyway, but given the rare and unprecedented opportunity of studying the alien, a careful dissection and microscopic study, that might have taken weeks, would have been done.

Finally, some of the best evidence against the film is the film itself. According to Santilli the cameraman was with the military. Military cameramen are trained to carefully record events, like autopsies, in a prescribed way. Standard procedure for an important autopsy would include two cameras. One mounted above the table looking down, and one on a stationary, raised tripod in a location where there would be a clear view of the proceedings. The cameraman's style (shifting positions, getting his view blocked, climbing around and over the medical workers) would have gotten him, according to one former military officer, "back scrubbing pots in the kitchen."

It appears that the cameraman may have been purposely obscuring the proceedings to hide defects in the hoax. Experts also indicate that for such an important event as this color, not black and white, film would have been used. Also a "still" photographer would work hand-in-hand with the motion photographer to record every step of the procedure. There is no record in the film of another photographer in the room, nor the tell-tale light from his flash bulbs.

The film itself also lacks the "flash" that usually appears at the beginning of each segment. All spring-wound cameras of that time start up slowly and overexpose the first few frames after the trigger is pressed. This indicates either a more sophisticated motor driven camera was used instead of what was claimed, or the film has been edited.

It also seems incredible that a top-secret film like this would not have been collected from the photographer immediately after it had been shot. Cameramen given top-secret assignments in the military were not allowed to develop their own film........."

See whole article here:
The UnMuseum - Alien Autopsy Film
I recall reading this years ago, and thinking, "What a novel idea! Find some people who know about real autopsies, especially military autopsies, and ask them what they think of the film." As I recall, by the time this analysis appeared in print the hoax was pretty well debunked, but it has been a long time and it's a topic that really does not merit further thought.
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
What's old is new again. Bob Lazar. Phil Imbrogno. This is one more retread. This is one cud we like to chew.
 

1963

Noble
What's old is new again. Bob Lazar. Phil Imbrogno. This is one more retread. This is one cud we like to chew.

Hi PF, hope your doing well mate :Thumbsup: ... Here's a bit more cud for you to chew on if you've got a dull half hour to fill.



... and "the bandwagon keeps a rolling on".

[ps. does this mean that all of those old Elvis films could be fake? :p ]

Cheers Buddy.
 
Top