what happened to the UFO videos that paul bennewitz made?

Discussion in 'UFOs & Sightings' started by humanoidlord, Feb 1, 2019.

  1. Creepy Green Light

    Creepy Green Light Don't mistake lack of talent for genius

    Messages:
    636
    I got fooled by him too. My friend got me into him. My friend even went so far as to using the map of the solar system that they had (with the arrow showing which way the planets revolve around the sun) on the cover of his music CD.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. pigfarmer

    pigfarmer tall, thin, irritable

    Messages:
    1,926
    Ruppelt said there was a completely terrestrial explanation but didn't reveal anything else because he wanted to protect the identity of the person who figured it out. A scientist working for the government on some other projects. THAT sort of answer doesn't even satisfy me and I see the same flock of birds (plover?).

    Of course, to maintain our scientific integrity we ought to track down some of the s*** this UFO undoubtedly left on somebody's car to have it tested and see if the urea originated on Earth.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Creepy Green Light

    Creepy Green Light Don't mistake lack of talent for genius

    Messages:
    636
    I just read that for the first time last night when I was reading up about the Lubbock lights.
     
  4. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,329
    for me it was the roswell slides, looked pretty promising at the start due to it's existance being revealed for the first time in a university conference, and then they finally revealed it and i knew straight away that it was a mummy
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,329
    the sightings made by the scientists were definitely birds (the confusion was due to the new lamps being used for illumination)
    as for that picture the teenage took, i don't know, i have no idea how he could have faked it
     
  6. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,329
    his secret explanation was bugs, bugs illuminated by the street lights
    according to kevin randle
     
  7. Creepy Green Light

    Creepy Green Light Don't mistake lack of talent for genius

    Messages:
    636
    If Jaime Mussaun is involved you can 99% guarantee its a fraud/hoax/misidentification.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. Justice Fodor

    Justice Fodor "Nobody wants justice." -- Alan Dershowitz

    Messages:
    72
    Higher up in this thread, wwkirk and others have referred to X Descending, by Christian P. Lambright, an e-book published in 2011. A large portion of the book is about a movie (super8) of a parade of UFOs, filmed by Ray Stanford in 1985, and in particular about what Stanford and Lambright believe to be images of one of the objects emitting from its leading surface "beam pulsing," for the speculated purpose of facilitating its progress through the atmosphere. Lambright refers to the object as a "beam ship." Lambright believes that a scientist who apparently saw images derived from this movie was inspired to perform experiments that resulted in papers dealing with generation of an "air spike" in front of a craft to facilitate travel through an atmosphere.

    However, contrary to the statement of wwkirk above, Lambright's book contains absolutely no photographic images taken from the Stanford movie. Instead, it contains images "drawn from memory" -- apparently by Lambright -- based on his viewing, at Stanford's residence, of slides that Stanford says he made or had made from the original super8 movie. I saw nothing in the book to suggest that Lambright even possesses copies of the slides. Lambright writes that he has also seen "computer enhanced" versions of the slides that Stanford made or had made. It is not clear how much the drawings in the book owe to the unspecified computer enhancements, if at all.

    I am attaching screen shots of the pages from X Descending that contain the "from memory" drawings of what Lambright thinks he saw in the slides.

    Keep in mind that a full super8 frame negative is only about 5.8 mm by 4.0 mm.

    Nothing I say about this matter reflects any disrespect to Christian Lambright. I do not know him, but I understand that he has a reputation for honesty. Furthermore, I think Lambright's book is worth reading for its discussion of the color images taken by Paul Bennewitz of objects over the Manzano nuclear weapons storage site in New Mexico -- images that are contained in the book, unlike the Stanford images.

    However, I do believe that there are very substantial reasons to respectfully question some of Lambright's published premises, assessments, and conclusions pertaining to Stanford's movie. There is much more that I could say about that, if there is interest here in exploring it further.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Awesome Awesome x 3
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  9. wwkirk

    wwkirk Celestial

    Messages:
    1,646
    Thanks for the enlightening observations. I have never read Lambright's book and was relying on advertisements.
     
  10. Justice Fodor

    Justice Fodor "Nobody wants justice." -- Alan Dershowitz

    Messages:
    72
    You're welcome. As I said, there is much more to be said about the matter of the movie and related claims, but as a newcomer, I do not wish to drone on if the subject matter is not of interest to longtime participants here.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  11. Toroid

    Toroid Founding Member

    Messages:
    5,642
    Welcome to AE.
    q9
     
  12. Autumn Sun

    Autumn Sun Adept

    Messages:
    35
    Do you think they were intentionally left out or maybe for another intentional reason?
     
  13. Justice Fodor

    Justice Fodor "Nobody wants justice." -- Alan Dershowitz

    Messages:
    72
    Since you ask, and since the chief site moderator put a tag of approval on my first post, I will elaborate.

    Some of what follows is opinion, but where I quote someone or refer to a specific event, I have documentation. Two documents of possible interest are uploaded with this post.

    It is my opinion that none of the Stanford photos are in Lambright's book, because Stanford fears subjecting these images and his bold claims about them to serious critical examination and commentary. Stanford has a long history of getting a lot of mileage out of extraordinary UFO evidence claims, while avoiding subjecting his supposedly world-shaking evidences to serious critical scrutiny.

    For purposes of a smoother narrative, I will repeat part of what I said earlier. This discussion is about a book by Christian P. Lambright, X Descending, much of which has to do with a super8mm movie of UFOs shot by Ray Stanford in 1985, a movie which Lambright believes was responsible for a "major aerospace propulsion breakthrough."

    Nothing I say here reflects any disrespect to Christian Lambright. I do not know him, but I understand that he has a reputation for honesty. I think Lambright's book is worth reading for its discussion of the color images taken in 1979 by Paul Bennewitz of objects over the Manzano nuclear weapon storage site in New Mexico. I have nothing critical to say about that part of the book. What follows is intended to question some of Lambright's premises and judgments about the Ray Stanford claims.

    The Stanford images are said to originate with film shot in a super8mm camera and 10x telephoto lens in Corpus Christi, Texas, in October 1985. If I understand correctly, the film is said to show several objects, which were said to be part of a procession of 7 or 8 objects.

    In the book, Lambright says that in early 1986 he first saw slides that Stanford made from this super8 movie, in Stanford's residence. Lambright was greatly impressed. (See the screenshot of the first two pages of Lambright's chapter 5, "Beam Ship," posted above.) During another visit to Stanford in 2002, Lambright writes, "The latest computer enhanced images he had made from the film were far and away the most amazing yet."

    A super8 frame negative is about 5.8 mm by 4.0 mm. The size of the UFO images in this case are not known to me, but it is an important question.

    This now is very important -- Lambright's book contains absolutely no actual reproductions of photographic images from Stanford's film, whether "computer enhanced" or otherwise. The book does contain four drawings, three of them color. As far as I could find the artist was not named, but I got the strong impression that Lambright himself was the artist. However, it appears he was not viewing an illuminated slide when doing the drawing: the caption on the page that contains three of the drawings says "These images are drawn from memory . . ." (See Lambright figure 12 above) This notation is a testament to Lambright's honesty, but certainly adds to the reservations I have about the claims made about the revelations said to be contained in the images.

    So, to summarize, Lambright has seen enlargements of what have to be fairly small images, including some images "computer enhanced" in unknown ways. The images, both before and after unknown enhancements, impressed him. From memory Lambright made drawings, which among other fine details show what he describes as a "beam-pulsing" in front of the object. He speculates that this "spike" may be related to the ability of such objects to go through the atmosphere without great disturbance.

    Lambright argues at length that a scientist named Leik Myrabo, who apparently saw the Stanford images in 1988, was thereby inspired to do a series of experiments, first publicized in 1994, on the concept of creating a "hypershock tunnel" in front of an aerial craft through generation of an "air spike." It may be so. It seems, however, that Lambright's considerable efforts to get Myrabo to publicly confirm this version of events were not successful.

    I see no clear indication that Lambright possesses copies of the Corpus Christi UFO images, "computer enhanced" or otherwise.

    More important, I read no indication that the original super8 film itself has been examined by anyone with technical expertise, or even that the slides said to have been made from the film have been subjected to expert examination and analysis (a process which could not be accomplished, of course, in the living room of Ray Stanford), at least not by anybody independent of Stanford. I have seen no evidence that the super8 camera itself received expert examination, or the 10x telephone lens. (In an transcript of a long interview with Stanford about the Corpus Christi event, that a friend encountered elsewhere on the internet and preserved, Stanford said this lens contained 22 glass elements-- elements which at one point during the UFO episode he feared had come apart, before concluding that this had not occurred.)

    In the book, Lambright reproduces illustrations that depict aspects of Myrabo's experiments (see Lambright figure 14). There is a similarity between what is shown in the Myrabo illustrations and the Lambright drawings. This would be of greater interest to me if we had the actual Stanford photographic images (unenhanced) to compare with the illustrations associated with the Myrabo "air spike" research. Lambright writes, "For as long as I've known him I have encouraged Ray to reveal is films for everyone to see . . .," but no such public disclosure has occurred.

    Stanford himself has made bold claims for the Corpus Christi film. In the lengthy interview transcript that I referred to earlier, Stanford said, "We also have evidence within this film of the existence of a dipolar magnetic field around the object [affecting] the atmosphere around and ahead of this object to the extent that I describe this film as being 'propulsion diagnostic'. At least for that type of UFO. What we have on that film, in my opinion (and in the opinion of aerospace engineers who have likewise examined images from the film) could explain how UFOs could travel at hypersonic speed and not produce a shock wave. I'll leave the details [of this analysis] for the time of the publication of this film and its analysis. All who have seen the Corpus Christi film think it is hands-down the best movie or video ever taken of authentic UFOs. It is in fact propulsion diagnostic."

    Perhaps so. But a great deal seems to depend in faith in the detailed narrative of Ray Stanford, on blind trust in the processes by which the images Lambright saw were created (including the unknown computer enhancements of some images), and on the validity of the interpretations, verbal and graphic, placed on those small images, first by Stanford and then by Lambright.

    Lambright writes (see screen shot of the "Beam Ship" pages) that he has made his own assessment, based on what he refers to as his personal intuition or a "bullshit meter," that Stanford is credible on UFO-related matters. Others feel that far more skepticism is in order. This "beam ship" claims are part of a bigger picture. Over a period of 40 years and more, Stanford has made quite a number public claims to have obtained extraordinary UFO data, involving an unknown but substantial number of supposedly independent UFO events experienced by Stanford: films, still images, magnetic recordings, beam effects, et cetera.

    Stanford also has made successive promises that various evidences would be subjected to expert analysis and made public, but the fulfillment of these promises has been ever receding, the reasons for delay ever shifting. In recent years, it has been said that Stanford was awaiting a better book deal. It was suggested he was holding back because his feelings were hurt that somebody questioned his background or credibility. In a recent radio interview, Stanford even claimed that his reluctance in releasing important UFO evidence was because he thought it might hurt "national security."

    Further, there is ample documentation that Ray Stanford has a long history of making many claims pertaining to UFOs that are, to put it mildly, unsubstantiated. Many have heard something about Stanford being active in the "contactee" culture in the 1950s, associated with the likes of George Adamski and George Hunt Williamson. Some have seen his 1958 book Look Up, about his amazing contacts with "Space Brothers." In more recent years, Stanford has dismissed those 1950's writings as youthful misinterpretations.

    Fewer, however, are aware of UFO-related claims made by Stanford many years after the Adamski period. For example, in material published in the 1970's, Stanford, supposedly while in a trance, "channeled" long discourses from members of the "White Brotherhood" including "Aramda," a member of a race of extraterrestrials known as "The Watchers." These "White Brothers" strongly promoted various Stanford-centered projects including "Project Starlight International," which Stanford put forward to the general public as a scientific effort to obtain hard data on UFOs.

    I will attempt to post PDF images of two newsletters that Stanford's organization put out in 1978, when Stanford was 40 years old.
    Both of these newsletters contained explicit claims that Stanford had obtained instrumented UFO data of great import that would be analyzed and published soon. The newsletter number 18 (September 29, 1978) speaks (on pages 4 and 5) of forthcoming publication of instrumented data from five UFO events that "MAY THROW CONSIDERABLE LIGHT ON SUCH QUESTIONS AS HOW ADVANCED A TECHNOLOGY IS INVOLVED AND WHAT PHYSICAL STATES ARE UTILIZED FOR PROPULSION AND MANEUVERS." (The capitals are in the original.) Again, this was in 1978. Has anyone seen this evidence?

    The same newsletter, pages 6 through 13, contains a long speech to the organization's members and donors by "Jeshua," identified as "the Lord" (Jesus Christ), speaking through the vocal cords of the entranced Ray Stanford. Some will find it a fascinating read.

    The newsletter number 19 (November 17, 1978) continues in the same vein, speaking of ongoing preparation to publish, in both an in-house publication and in "scientific and technical journals," UFO evidence that "will, in my opinion, demonstrate rather conclusively that highly advanced technological devices, not of earthly origin visited this world last December and, again, in July 1978. Because of the support you each have shown, this in-depth Journal will be sent to you as soon as it comes from the printer." I am not aware that any such publications actually appeared. Have any of you seen this world-shaking evidence?

    There are boxes full of similar material by and about Stanford from that period available in private collections. I have read a good deal of it. Some of it is difficult to reconcile with aspects of the UFO-related narrative and personal history that Stanford has put out in various forums and interviews in more recent years.

    It is my personal conclusion that any claims by Ray Stanford to possess UFO photos, films, or other physical evidence should be disregarded, unless and until the original non-enhanced images and other pertinent data are made available for examination and analysis by persons with genuine expertise -- persons who are demonstrably independent of Stanford. After that, the images and analyses should be made public. This would make it possible to evaluate the Corpus Christi images (or any of the other extraordinary UFO evidences that Stanford has claimed to possess) in the light of all factors. Stanford's personal claims and interpretations would be one part of that process of evaluation, but not, in my view, the most important part.
     
    • Awesome Awesome x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  14. Justice Fodor

    Justice Fodor "Nobody wants justice." -- Alan Dershowitz

    Messages:
    72
    I decided to upload one more document of a different type. It is an interview with Stanford published in Psychic magazine in April 1974. It contains a fair amount of material related to some of Stanford's UFO claims.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Awesome Awesome x 2
  15. Creepy Green Light

    Creepy Green Light Don't mistake lack of talent for genius

    Messages:
    636
    With all due respect - I'm way ahead of ya ;)

    Stanford is a quack. BTW - I have actual video of a 3 headed dragon/sea monster from when I was out fishing. However, I'm not willing to share it or show it to anybody. But it's real. I promise.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  16. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,329
    go on
    i really want to know why ray stanford is so secretive
     
  17. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,329
    and why he does that? he isn't going to gain or lose (he is very old) anything!
     
  18. Creepy Green Light

    Creepy Green Light Don't mistake lack of talent for genius

    Messages:
    636
    At this point I doubt any of us are on the edge of our seats waiting for Stanford's big reveal. If he had anything legit - the proper people would have examined it by now. We all know the real reason he doesn't let anybody examine it - because he knows it would go the way of the Roswell Slides. There would be a "dream team" of people that would tear his "evidence" to shreds & he knows it.
     
  19. Justice Fodor

    Justice Fodor "Nobody wants justice." -- Alan Dershowitz

    Messages:
    72
    It appears to me that I have played a role here in diverting what started out as a thread about the Bennewitz images, into a discussion of some of the many UFO evidence claims of Ray Stanford. The Bennewitz images are very interesting and important to discuss, and I did not mean to hijack the thread. I am now going to start an fresh, independent thread that will be devoted solely to claims related to the Stanford Corpus Christi film, certain other Stanford UFO evidence claims, and some reasons to be skeptical about such Stanford claims. For starters, I will recapitulate there what I have already said in this thread, but in greater detail, and then appropriate discussion can follow. I would invite anyone who wishes to comment on the Stanford-related matters to join me on the new thread. Thank you.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  20. Justice Fodor

    Justice Fodor "Nobody wants justice." -- Alan Dershowitz

    Messages:
    72
    The new Ray Stanford thread is here:

    Ray Stanford and His Ever-Receding Claims of World-Shaking UFO Evidences

    In the new Stanford thread, I have substantially expanded what I wrote in my posts above, providing additional quotes and other documentation. I have also expressed some of my points with greater clarity. I recommend, therefore, that anyone interested in the Ray Stanford aspects of this thread not bother at all with what I posted above -- it is all set forth more coherently on the new thread. Thank you.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Thanks Thanks x 1

Share This Page