Showing posts with label Television. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Television. Show all posts

Monday, March 16, 2015

"Roswell Slides" or Fraud Prints?





“People are asking for science, but these are photos. 
There is only so much science you can get out of photos.” 
Adam Dew quoted at Open Minds


"Please, do not be skeptical, give it a chance, as you will see, 
it is much better than anything you have on TV sci-fi, 
and also the worst that could happen 
(no, not an alien invasion) 
is to come out with a new perspective, 
far from what they show you in the movies."
Jaime Maussan (translated) beWitness

A Roswell Slides Recap

To summarize the Roswell Slides history: Tom Carey put together a Dream Team to produce the ultimate Roswell book. The project got sidetracked, but Carey continued to work with his writing partner Don Schmitt, assisted by Anthony Bragalia and David Rudiak, who both had provided help for the Witness to Roswell book. Then, the slides entered the story. As much as possible, I’m going to let the players themselves tell the tale.


Top: Carey, Maussan, Schmitt
Bottom: Bragalia, Dew, Rudiak

Adam Dew makes a call

The slide collection seems to have been owned by a couple in Midland, Texas, Bernerd and Hilda Ray. Adam Dew claims that a friend’s sister salvaged some slides while cleaning out a house that was going to be demolished. 
“A quick timeline as I understand it: Hilda died in 1988. Slides discovered when emptying out a garage outside of Sedona (Cottonwood we think) in 1998. Slides were deemed intersting (obviously old color slides) but not fully examined until around 2008. While I think that the home may have belonged to Hilda's lawyer, there is no way to know for sure as the woman who found them didn't keep records of the homes she cleaned out. ...I don't think the slides came from Hilda's home.”http://ufocon.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-many-slides-stories.html
Adam Dew of SlideBox Media, LLC

The woman’s brother told Dew about the slides in 2012. Dew formed SlideBox Media, LLC and took the lead in marketing the slides. The show started coming together when he contacted Carey and Schmitt.


Secrets Exposed

Bragalia's article as printed in UFO Today magazine.



While the search for a profitable platform for the slides was on, details about them leaked out. Anthony Bragalia wrote an article outlining that the slides, showed a corporeal being. It was a humanoid, most certainly not of earth and it was dead.”  Based chiefly on Bernerd Ray’s profession as a geologist, Bragalia speculated that,
Given this background on the slides we are now confronted with an inescapable truth:
A prominent geologist who explored the New Mexico desert in the 1940s is directly associated with two 1947 Kodachromes depicting a humanoid corpse as found at Roswell.”
In other words: a weird picture of a body was found, and a scenario was imagined, trying to tie it to Roswell. In the comments, Bragalia states, “I am aware that two 1947 slides of a dead alien do not equate to tissue slides/samples or the actual cadaver itself. But given the confirmed authenticity and provenance of the slides- it is as close as we will ever come that kind of physical evidence.”

Provenance. That’s a funny word to use when there’s nothing to tie the content of the slides to UFOs, Roswell, the military or even the United States of America. It can’t be proven these slides were taken by the Rays. As Adam Dew notes, it can’t be determined who owned the house where the slides were found.

Wait and see, they say!

There is very little left to wait for, just the allegedly clear images of the slides themselves. The promoters and their associates have been discussing the details of the slides and voicing their conclusions about the slides since 2013. The delay in showing them was due to the search for a platform to release them, and they’ve chosen an entertainment venue,  Auditorio Nacional in Mexico City.

Due to the carelessness in the “Kodachrome - A Documentary - Official Trailer,” images of the slides have been isolated, and “leaked” online. According to one insider, it is as good or better than what he could see viewing them on a lap top.

Eyewitness testimony about the “Roswell Slides”


Larry Lemke posted about examining the slides, and has posted the best description available about what is depicted.

Early in March, 2014, I met with the owner of the slides, viewed them, and talked to him about his plans. (Actually, I viewed digital reproductions of the slides.) ... The owner affirmed that it is his intent to present the slides and their story to the public in a non-sensationialistic forum, after he has satisfied himself as to their authenticity. He feels he is nearing the end of that phase.

He goes on to describe the photographs:

1. There are 2 photos, taken in an indoor setting.

2. The photos are of poor quality (focus, exposure) compared to virtually all the other photos in the same collection. For this reason, edge detection, contrast enhancement and other photoanalysis techniques are warranted and are being used.

3. The photos appear to have been taken about 4 or 5 feet from the humanoid, from a position slightly above it.

4. To my eye, the humanoid is lying on a clear glass shelf and is surrounded by either clear glass walls and/or a full glass enclosure. The enclosure appears to be more like a rectangular box than like a bottle.

5. In one of the photos, a woman is standing behind the glass case (visible from approximately the waist down). In the other photo a man is visible in the same location, leading to speculation that the man and the woman traded places and took turns taking pictures.

6. The humanoid is not immersed in a fluid; it appears to be open to the air (at least if the lid were off).

7. The glass shelf/ box that the humanoid is on/in appears to be supported on shelf brackets that are connected to vertical, metal supports. The vertical supports are perforated at regular intervals (nominally, 1 inch spacing) by drilled holes. The shelf arrangement gives the appearance of a laboratory apparatus rack.

8. The humanoid is lying on its back, with its head to the camera’s left and feet to the right.

9. There is some type of placard on the front of the glass case, with (currently undecipherable, out-of-focus) writing on it. (Shades of the Ramey memo!) It is my suspicion that this placard is the source of the idea that the genital area of the humanoid was deliberately covered up in order to escape the wrath of the censors when the slides were developed. I don’t think that is the case. From what I could see, the genital area was not visible to the camera due to the view angle of the camera. I suspect that the placard simply serves to identify the contents of the glass case.

10. The proportions of the humanoid appear to be slightly different than a “normal” human, but probably, no single dimension of the body is outside the range of naturally occurring sizes. The length of the head (crown to chin) is approximately the same length as the torso (neck to crotch). The arm length (shoulder to wrist) is approximately the length of the torso (i.e., the wrist joint is approximately aligned with the hip bone). The leg bones are long, compared to the arms.

11. Given that the body is about 3 feet long, if it is human, then it must be either a child or an adult with a developmental disorder. (Human Trisomy 17 has been suggested as a candidate.)

12. I could not see digits on either the hands or feet, and so could not count them.

13. The mouth is open and no teeth are visible.

14. The skin of the humanoid is smooth and appears to have shrunk taut against the bones (ribs, legs, arms, cranium). Whether this is due to natural effects of death (saponification, dessication, etc.) or is the result of some post-mortem treatment (embalming, freezing, etc.) is not clear.

15. The head appears to have been severed from the top of the spinal column and then replaced, lying at an unnatural angle relative to the torso.

There is nothing in the photo that would either definitively connect this to the Roswell event or definitively disconnect it. Any connection is coincidental (it appears to have been taken at about the right time). http://ufocon.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-roswell-slides-may-not-see-light-of.html

Leaked slide image by Narrenschiffer 

The leaked image must not be all that bad. Lemke refers to it as showing more detail than what he was shown of the originals.

"Nearly a year ago I saw what I would consider low resolution computer screen images of the slides for a period of about 10 to 15 minutes. ... the images I saw at that time were of poor enough quality that I could not see other features that others were claiming to be present. ... It wasn’t until I saw the cleaned up images earlier today that I could see enough detail to form an opinion... Having looked at the cleaned up image produced by the Germans over at the UFO Conjectures site, it looks to me like a hydrocephalic child is a pretty good fit. ... possibly an Andean mummy.http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2015/02/roswell-slides-and-video-clips.html

Physical Evidence?

Supposedly, Kodak experts have certified that the slides are authentic. The team promoting the slides has focused on discussing their age and supposed authenticity of the slides, but that’s only a small part of what’s important about them. We need to see proof of several other things before they can be considered evidence of anything.

 Tom Carey was the one to first make an official teaser announcement about the slides and what he claims they are. “We have come into possession of a couple of Kodachrome color slides of an alien being lying in a glass case,” he said it was, “3 and a half to 4 feet tall, the head is almost insect-like. The head has been severed, and there’s been a partial autopsy; the innards have been removed, and we believe the cadaver has been embalmed, at least at the time this picture was taken. 


Tom Carey
In the promo video used in the beWitness press conference, Jaime Maussan asks Tom Carey if the slides are physical evidence, and Carey responds, "I think it's physical evidence. I think we have physical evidence." Carey then goes on to say, "A picture is worth a thousand words." 

No, it’s not physical evidence, and it’s important to understand when a picture has value. Usually, a photo can begin to be considered supporting evidence only when time, location and the photographer are known. In addition, it’s vital to know what instrument recorded the data. We don’t have the camera or any of the other information about how the slides of the body were taken. The other claims are all based on speculation, trying to make the slides and the Ray’s history fit into the narrative of the Roswell story. 

Don Schmitt
Don Schmitt has been somewhat more cautious in his statements, emphasizing the witness testimony collected in their books. Maussan asked him if it is the greatest story of all time. “One of the greatest stories. I always say of the millennium, so in the last thousand years, yes.”



More Eyewitness testimony about the “Roswell Slides”


From a beWitness promo video

Anthony Bragalia said, 
"Clear versions of the slides depict a being whose anatomy does not correspond to a human being. The limbs (legs and arms) are exceeding thin, frail and fragile, characteristics that are not associated with hydrocephalus. In fact, the torso (which has been opened) and rest of the body look nothing like any known case of hydrocephalus in history. The structure looks very make-shift, resembling a quickly-assembled ‘erector set’ type deal, with beams that have ratchet holes in them. The set-up in no way whatsoever resembles that of a professional museum display. ... I believe that this is a 'private viewing' of a creature recently deceased, partially autopsied, and preserved.”http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-roswell-slides-update-by-tony.html
Not everyone agrees with his assessment, and many have found that the photos closely resemble an ancient body on display in a museum case being photographed by a tourist.

Placard: Employees must wash hands after touching alien?
Roswell expert David Rudiak was asked to analyze if the placard on the body.

“Because poor focus seemed to be the main problem, I tried various refocusing software, but couldn't get what I thought were consistent results. ... Tom Carey wanted me to have a look because of my work on the Ramey memo. But there is much less to work with here, such as unknown circumstances and font, quite unlike the Ramey memo. I'm not claiming to be a full-fledged image processing expert, and when examination of the placard in high resolution is hopefully undertaken after May 5 by multiple qualified people, maybe we will get a definitive answer as to what is shown.
As Robert Hastings just wrote... the placard is the key to resolving this thing (or somebody finding something like a child mummy that is an exact match to what is shown.)

 I remember paying most of my attention on the head and commenting to Tom that it looked much more human than I would have expected if it was an alien.” http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-roswell-slides-and-mummies.html
 Rudiak also said,
“I agree that it makes no sense that the Rays could casually photograph an alien corpse on display somewhere. Further, there is that woman in the dress standing in one of the pictures. From the low quality screen captures we've seen, the dress does NOT suggest a military nurse standing in the picture, but a civilian. I agree it looks more like a civilian setting, perhaps a museum, perhaps somewhere else.?"http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-roswell-slides-and-me.html

Tom Carey and Jaime Maussan
Jaime Maussan asks Tom Carey, as a physical anthropologist, to explain what type of creature is pictured in the slides, and if it is a primate. Carey says it is bipedal, but does not recognize it as being human, but that, “Certainly, in our taxonomic categories that we use since Carolus Linnaeus described the order of primates, it certainly does look like it would be classified as a primate, perhaps even a hominid.”
Conferencia de Prensa Jaime Maussan beWITNESS / Sé Testigo Auditorio Nacional
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wxezh3MJLGA (At 1:16:00)


perhaps even a hominid
A quote from Witness To Roswell by Carey & Schmitt, pages 35-37:
“In science, where the bottom line is also the search for truth, Occam’s Law of Parsimony, a.k.a. Occam's Razor, is used to decide among competing hypotheses the one that best explains the observed data. It holds that, with all other factors being equal, the simplest hypothesis that explains the most observed data is the best, and must prevail. Thus employed, it serves as a tool for eliminating competing-but-lacking theories, hypotheses, and from others being considered.”

Ergo, a picture of a hominid in a glass case is a dead Roswell alien.

Since there is no actual evidence provided by the slides, the promoters are trying to prop it up by marrying it to the Roswell research done by Carey and Schmitt.  



The Cinco de Mayo show



The slides were originally said to be awaiting presentation in a non-sensational format, but that changed. Jaime Maussan came on board, arranging for the venue and advertising, billing it as a chance of a lifetime, to be able to witness a historical event, the presentation of evidence of extraterrestrials.




As best I can tell, the program will go something like this: Jaime Maussan as host, Carol Rosin will introduce Edgar Mitchell, who is there as part cheerleader and part celebrity endorsement. Adam Dew will introduce the story about the mysterious well-connected Rays, then Carey & Schmitt will pick it up and frame it in the context of Roswell (probably giving with a recap of their research and digs, bringing out an alleged witness to testify it looks like what he saw at RAAF. 
Witness testimony.

The slides will be projected, then the CGI hologram of the body onstage. Richard Dolan fits in there somewhere, supposedly helping us digest how this Disclosure will change our World. Maussan will probably close the show with a speech about how everyone has witnessed history, the cast will take a final bow, the lights will come on. An  announcer may direct the audience to pick a up a few souvenirs on their way out.

Jaime Maussan is advertising the show this way:
Be WITNESS, El Cambio de la Historia contará con tecnología de punta: tridimensional y holográfica por primera vez en México y en el Auditorio Nacional, un evento con características únicas para ser testigos directos de la realidad extraterrestre en la Tierra, un evento único e irrepetible.
Translation:
Be WITNESS, The Changing the of History will feature technology: three-dimensional holographic, a first in Mexico and the National Auditorium, an event with unique characteristics in order to be direct witnesses of extraterrestrial reality on Earth, a unique and unrepeatable event. 

It ain't over 'til it's over


A sequel? KOB 4 reported that "The (Roswell International UFO Museum & Research Center) museum says there will be a presentation on the pictures in Roswell during the UFO festival in July." Alejandro Rojas informs me that, "Don and Tom are board members and present every year." Additionally, Don Schmitt has several solo convention appearances booked.

What about scientific study of the slides? Adam Dew says he's asked around a bit, but that science will have to wait until after the show. 
"I will continue to show the slides to more pediatricians/forensic pathologists/etc. And after May 5, every forensic pathologist on Earth can take a stab at it."


Some further reading on the "Roswell Slides" story:

Tim Printy, May 5, 2015: The day that will change the world
José Antonio Caravaca, Roswell Slides: The Moment of Truth
Tim HebertCurrent State of Affairs: Roswell Linked Kodak Slides
Jeff RitzmannThe Birth of Anti-Evidence: The ‘Roswell Slides’
Paul KimballBragalia on mummies and the "Roswell slides"
Gilles FernandezThe Roswell Slides Saga: Some Claims versus some Facts

Thursday, December 11, 2014

TV takes on the Cash-Landrum UFO case

UFO Conspiracies

(Updated 12/11/14)
The National Geographic UFO series aired in the UK as UFO: Alien Invasion, but in most other countries as Invasion Earth. It was produced by Pioneer Productions for National Geographic Channels and Science, and was broadcast in the US as UFO Conspiracies starting November 19, Wednesday (10 PM - 11 PM) on Science Channel.

In the UK
In non-English thinking countries.

Here's a link to summaries of the 8 episode series:
http://natgeotv.com.au/tv/invasion-earth/episodes.aspx?series=1

I'm only concerned with their coverage of the Cash-Landrum story, featured in episode 4,  "UFO Swarm" which aired in the US December 10. It's the final third of the program, a segment about thirteen minutes long:

“Witnesses in Texas claim their confusing physical illnesses are the result of a massive, fiery object and in the skies above Brazil, jet fighters play cat and mouse with unknown lights.”


Vickie, Colby & Betty, as portrayed by actors.

Дело денежных Ландрум НЛО

I'd originally seen the Russian-language version of the episode featuring the C-L case, but have  updated this article after hearing the show in English. It's mostly a review of the case, but with a few new elements and discussions. Archival footage of Betty Cash and Vickie Landrum telling their story from the 1985 HBO show, UFOs: What’s Going On? is used.  The treatment of the case is serious and respectful, and the production values are good. The re-enactment scenes fairly tastefully done, the big clunker being the awful wig that would have embarrassed Vickie Landrum. 

Not bad, but a little too close.

The portrayal of the UFO is disappointing, but in some shots, not so bad. The scale of the object is good, but it seems to placed be a bit too low, and close to the car, about half the distance reported in the case (but not bad for TV). The flames are pitiful in comparison to description, and should have been about equal to the UFO’s width.



They literally made the UFO a diamond...

The worst is when it's shown to be a literal giant diamond. The witnesses used the diamond description, but just for the outline. It was not described as four-sided, but more ovoid with a bulging midline. Other shots show a big lighted shape that isn't so distinct, which was much better. The only attempt to portray the Chinook helicopters was a short shot of the UFO surrounded by spotlights.


Just pretend those are CH-47 spotlights.

The worst problem was the fact the incident was simplified for television. The case is complex enough it would need at least a full episode to do it justice, but it just gets a hit-and-run treatment. All that is featured in the reenactment is the initial encounter of the UFO and they do not examine the sightings from later locations or the movement by it or the helicopters the witnesses described.



Cash-Landrum UFO, as seen on TV.
They leave out some key elements of the story, such as Betty's account of burning her hand on the door handle as she returned to the car. The actress was wearing a sweater instead of the leather jacket Betty used to open the door.

Presentation of Medical Evidence


Radiologist, not.

Far too much time is given to Dr. Bryan McClelland, the family physician who treated Betty Cash starting in 1983.  McClelland is sometimes misrepresented in the media as a radiologist, or Cash’s original physician or both, and in this program, it’s implied he treated her immediately after the incident. McClelland mentions that he began treating Betty Cash after she moved back to Alabama, but does not say that it was later than that, about 1983. He claims that her symptoms followed the pattern to exposure to radiation exposure. He also said that he'd that he taken a biopsy from Betty Cash and tested it, and insists that she was exposed to radiation that led to her health problems. (This is his opinion, and it is unsupported by any documentation.)

If you don't know, make something up.

Fictionalized wounds on the actor portraying Betty Cash are placed on her face, collar and arms.

Expert Commentary

Nick Pope is prominently featured in the series. Here, he is introduced as having studied the case for fifteen years, and he offers some commentary and speculation on the nature of the UFO, and discusses the charges of a government cover-up. He suggests that the UFO was a nuclear-powered prototype, possibly an unmanned  black project.

Chris Pocock, editor of Aviation International News offers comments on the secrecy regarding the testing of military projects and the locations where they are generally tested. He finds the secret test vehicle scenario unlikely, pointing out that such vehicles are not tested in populated areas.

Jim Thurston is captioned as “Medical Radiation Specialist.” He’s the head of Radiation Protection and Dosimetry at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. He discusses the effects of radiation and the dosage, and points out that a dose of ionizing radiation capable of producing the symptoms so rapidly would have been a lethal one. He dismisses radiation as the cause of injuries and points that exposure to chemicals could have produce the same symptoms.

There’s a discussion of some skeptical theories.

Dr. Robert Bartholomew is captioned as “Medical Sociologist,” and he’s written on UFO and paranormal topics, and believes most witnesses are sincere. He discusses that witnesses may be truthful, but be mistaken in interpreting what they’ve seen. Bartholomew points out that our memories do not playback what happened, but a reconstruction based on our interpretation. He also suggests that the stress of an encounter could produce psychosomatic physical problems such as rashes, headaches and vomiting.

Prof. Randy Cerveny, captioned as “Extreme Weather Expert,” is a professor of geographical sciences at Arizona State, and the author of two books on freakish weather. He discusses the possibility that the UFO was a superior mirage, possibly the reflection of the column of flame of a nearby oil refinery. 

Light pillar is too fancy, just say mirage for TV.

I have a source inside the film making industry, we'll call him PK. He tells me that shows like this shoot segments with "experts" where they talk about different topics, which are edited into bits of several different shows. That's what's happened here, and some of the comments are so generic they could have been used for most other UFO cases. None of their experts had any specific relation or familiarity with the Cash-Landrum case. Some of it is very good, but it lacks depth.

It's not over until the segment's over

The attempt by the witnesses to file a legal claim against the United States is very briefly discussed. They show a made-for-TV army document, then some of the case paperwork, including one from the Texas Department of Health (first published here at Blue Blurry Lines!) The implication is that officials lied under oath to cover up the events.

TDH document from BBL!
They tell the basic story, superficially deal with the pros and cons, and then seem to shrug, and leave it in the “who knows?” category.

Product Contains Less Than 1% Blue Blurry Lines 

I was in contact with Paola Desiderio, Pioneer’s Archive Assistant Producer, and exchanged a series of correspondence helping with getting them images, and putting them in touch with John Schuessler. Besides shopping BBL for ideas, they used some photos from this site, transformed to black and white. In the closing  credits, under Stock Footage, they list John Schuessler for the use of his photographs, but it’s his only acknowledgement in the show. Using my work without credit is forgivable, but Schuessler deserved far better.


I'd like to forget all the little people...

There were also negotiations with other parties to provide material on this case never before broadcast. Why those failed, I don’t yet know, but it gives me hope that it can yet be presented in a more thorough examination of the case. The key item of interest is the audio recording of the witnesses giving a statement to officers at Bergstrom Air Force Base in 1981. When the deal fell through to get the new interviews and materials, they should have just moved on to covering another UFO case.



There are two other programs coming in the near future that will discuss the Cash-Landrum case, NASA's Unexplained Files, and Hangar 1: The UFO Files. Investors are warned that, “past performance does not necessarily predict future results.” In the case of television, I think it does, and that these programs, too will botch the story. 

The best that can be hoped for about these UFO shows, is that people will hear about these cases and be prompted seek out more accurate information on them. Don't laugh. We can dream...

If National Geographic can’t get the Cash-Landrum case right, TV should just give up on it.

Television, you can’t handle the truth.

It's good to try new things, but stick to what you do well.

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Cash-Landrum As Seen on TV: Close Encounters


Late in December 2013, I was excited to see that the Cash-Landrum case was being featured on a new television series.




Close Encounters S01E03 “Second Coming” (Discovery Canada)
SECOND COMING: DECEMBER 29, 1980: Betty Cash, Vickie Landrum and her grandson Colby are driving home after visiting a bingo hall in Dayton, Texas. On a country road, they encounter a large, diamond-shaped craft shooting fire out of its base. The heat is so intense it melts the vinyl of their vehicle's dashboard. They report seeing at least a dozen military helicopters in pursuit of the object. All three suffer physical symptoms similar to radiation poisoning and spend a decade pressing the U.S. government for answers. Part 2: SPACE ROCK: MAY 20, 1967... Stefan Michalak's extraordinary encounter.

Before Close Encounters aired in the US on the Science Channel, "John Carter" at the French site, UFO SCEPTICISME  posted, "Curt is going to have a field day pointing out the many errors in the narrative and the depiction of the UFO."

My reply:
The Close Encounters show is not broadcast in the USA, but I have seen photos from the show and the very brief glimpse of the depiction of the case in their online preview. Wow! I was unaware of the lightning bolts or the UFO stopping the car, but knew that their choice of a angular flaming diamond with rectangular windows neither looked or acted like what the witnesses described. While they are getting many things, wrong, this series is less sensational than many others. Still, they strongly suggest the ET origin of the UFOs by their overly dramatic portrayal of them as bizarre structured vehicles. (Instead of the indistinct lighted shapes they usually are.)

There's a far worse show airing now in the States, "Unsealed Alien Files" It is so comically extreme in its fringe UFO claims as to make the new Canadian show seem factual. ("Hangar 1" has since joined the pack, chiefly different in that it carries a pedigree, claiming the stories are based on MUFON case files. )

John Carter provided a link to the show on YouTube, where I was able to watch it. There were many inaccuracies. Here are the ones I observed on the first viewing:

 

  • 4 door car instead of 2
  • Event was not in Liberty County, Huffman is in Harris County, the sighting area also may have partly occurred in Montgomery County
  • They were not lost
  • States object observed for more than an hour- false. Their series of encounters was about 17 minutes, with the object seen from a distance before and afterwards- maybe 35 minutes total if we stretch it.
  • The re-enactment has the UFO hovering over the car, covering it in flames- false. It was supposedly 130 feet away, and they only felt it radiate heat.
  • UFO depiction- inaccurate. The UFO appearance is controversial, but just relying on case literature, it is larger and IF there were lights or windows, they were small and indistinct.
  • Lightning- inaccurate. There have been theories suggested that the encounter was some kind of electrical event but it is not what the witnesses themselves described.
  • Interference with car's electrical system- Betty Cash did claim that in April 1981, but not the initial reports, a point of controversy in the case seldom discussed.
  • Panicked attempts to restart he auto- false.
  • Vickie burns hand on door handle- false, only Betty, and they depicted that incorrectly 
  • The description and depiction of the flames produced is inaccurate
  • Dashboard impression- overly dramatic depiction. The photographs of the impressions show mild indentations, not evidence of melting.
  • Witnesses reported seeing helicopter-like objects. No, they were specific that they saw helicopters.

Another shortcoming was to abbreviate the encounter, which continued as they observed the UFO from several other locations on their way home. Also, the entire aftermath of the case, the hospitalization, investigation and legal struggle were shortchanged. Part of that is due to the structure of the show, usually fitting two cases into a half hour, leaving room for commercial breaks. They are left focusing just on their namesake, the "Encounters" part of the story. 


The strangest thing was to change one of the most distinctive features from the case, the fiery exhaust seen from the UFO. It was depicted in the preview clip of the series, seen at 1:17 in the clip below:


Somehow, for the episode as broadcast, the special effects for the flames were replaced with unearthly lightning-like electrical bolts.  



How does this happen?

The show rounded up a good collection of UFO authorities to discuss the cases. I checked with Chris Rutkowski, asking about how the lightning got in there. He told me the producers asked him to speak about the case despite him not being an expert in it. He was repeating the story from memory, partially  based on an account where the UFO was producing sparks. Mark Rodeghier (an expert in UFO vehicle interference cases) also talked about the case, and he apparently misspoke, mixing the witnesses' names about who burned her hand opening the car door. The Discovery Canada show apparently used their erroneous descriptions without fact checking the case records. Chris had similar objections on the coverage of a case in the second part of the program, Michalak's Falcon Lake incident, which he has personally investigated. 


The show has been renewed for a second season. Australian ufologist Bill Chalker appeared on episodes on season one. Posting about his season one involvement on Facebook:
"Once again the 'recreations' are dramatic and entertaining and hopefully will encourage enquiring minds to dig into the actual data about the case. As I have extensively researched and investigated both cases I have issues with the fidelity of the "dramatic recreations" with the facts of both events. In both cases I know I supplied extensive material which gave detailed illustrated and photographic evidence and data, so some of the "recreation" deviations from the actual facts of each case are puzzling to me. But given the entertainment format I am consoled by the likelihood that the shows may encourage interest in these striking cases."

Chris Rutkowski also commented: 
" I found the recreations entertaining, but not particularly accurate. I also gave  them voluminous case records and was puzzled by their "creative licence" when the stories aired. I have no idea where some of their presented info came from. I know I am responsible for one error when I misspoke on a case detail, but the facts I supplied from files were sometimes distorted. That's showbiz!"

   



Television is not in the history business

Close Encounters is dramatic, to be sure, but far less sensationalistic than other shows of this type. Programs like this are chiefly concerned with putting a truth-flavored spooky story on the screen. Ratings and advertising revenue are what matter. Accuracy is a tertiary consideration at best. 

I hope that some viewers will be interested and read about the cases featured. Most viewers however, will not, just be briefly entertained by the television UFO mind candy.


Epilogue

There's even more coming. At least two other UFO TV shows are planning to cover the Cash-Landrum case for the 2014-15 season. One is a new series from Pioneer Productions for National Geographic Channels International,  shot under the working title Planet UFO, but seems to have been renamed Invasion Earth.