Extraterrestrial Evidence and Disclosure by Richard Shaver

Long before Steven Spielberg's Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Devil's Tower had a connection with extraterrestrial life. An ancient connection.

April 1947, two months before the report of flying saucers by Kenneth Arnold, "The Shaver Mystery" was the sole focus of editor Ray Palmer's June 1947 issue of Amazing Stories. The Shaver Mystery was about how we humans are the offspring of god-like ancient aliens, the reality behind all our myths and legends. After abandoning Earth, some of those they left behind were transformed into nasty little degenerate "deros." We came to call their space ships UFOs, and from their cavernous secret underground bases, their dero offspring are responsible for abductions, mutilations and other  of mankind's woes. Ray Palmer's editorial explained:

With the aid of such machines as the telaug (telepathic augmentor) and disintegrating rays, plus various instruments such as the "stim" which enhanced physical and emotional pleasures, these dero took to tormenting surface people and thereby being the basis for all of our legends of cavern wights, little people, demons, ghosts and — during the war — gremlins. They cause many unexplained accidents, such as those train wrecks, plane crashes, cerebral hemmorhages, etc. which are otherwise unexplainable. 

Further, Mr. Shaver declared that the Titans, living far away in space, or other people like them, still visit earth in space ships, kidnap people, raid the caves for valuable equipment, and, in general, supply the basis for all the weird stories that are so numerous (see Charles Fort's books) of space ships, beings in the sky, etc.

So, before the first flying saucer sighting, Richard Shaver was saying extraterrestrials were abducting humans.

Shaver the Experiencer

Richard Shaver's article for the June issue, "Proofs," was a response to the critics of his writings. In his introduction to his essay, he talks about the problems of being an experiencer or witness and knowing and telling the truth:

My strength is dedicated to informing you of the key and the way to the kind of life that produced the beauty and wisdom of those immortal beings of the past, beings whose actual existence has been proved a thousand times to those who, like myself, have had actual experience in the caverns. For we have seen and touched and used those antique mechanisms and we know whereof we speak. But until today, those who knew have feared to broadcast their knowledge, for in olden times it would have meant being burnt at the stake, and today most certainly the insane asylum.

There were giants in the earth in those days

Shaver's Titans were giants, and had been mentioned in the the Bible, and myths around the world. But for those who needed even more evidence, he delivers in "Proofs."

YOU ask for proofs of the giganticism of the far past — and you can find Devil's Tower (Wyoming) in any Atlas. It is a national monument ! If it isn't a gigantic petrified stump larger than any redwood ever hoped to be, I will eat my hat! The stump alone is taller than the Empire State building! What size were men when trees grew that size?

THEY were the men who are spoken of as the Aesir, under Ygdrasil's branches, planning a battle against the Frost Giants! And they had telaug beams (Odin's Eye), and they had "magical" underground dwarfs, and icy underworld realms of magic — and we have only the Devil's Tower to prove it today. But it was a long time ago; when the sun itself was more beneficial and less aging. BUT, BROTHER, HOW CAN YOU ASK FOR PROOF WHEN YOU HAVE A DEVIL'S TOWER?

There you have it, Devil's Tower proves the Shaver Mystery, and therefore, all the extraterrestrial space travel and beings within.

On the need for Disclosure

Richard Shaver fought against skeptical unbelievers, railed against official denials, and can be said to be a founding father for Disclosure:

MANY things could be obtained of infinite value from these people in the caverns, if all of our civilization was aware and trying to salvage even a bit of the mighty wisdom the Elder race left behind them in their miracles of machine art. BUT it can't be done as long as "officialdumb" frowns upon all such efforts as "superstition," "black art," or "crackpots." It is a vital and unseen side of our life WHICH MUST BE OPENED TO THE PUBLIC GAZE! 

“The fact is that any honest investigation of super-normal manifestation always and invariably turns up mighty important data; which data is shelved by fearful, ignorant and bigoted people who are quite sure that the school books are right, and that they cannot go contrary to opinion or they will lose their ‘position.’  ...SOMEONE, SOMETIME, HAS TO CONQUER THAT BLIND DENIAL OF FACT AND COME OUT IN THE OPEN WITH THE TRUTH...”

There's much more to Shaver's argument in "Proofs." For those who dare to read it all:

Amazing Stories, June 1947

The telaug of the dero could affect our minds, so who knows what misinformation they were making Shaver believe... or what they are making us believe now!

The Flying Saucer: A Manufactured Concept by Herbert Hackett

The Flying Saucer

A Manufactured Concept

Herbert Hackett

Ohio Wesleyan University 

(From Sociology and Social Research, May- June, 1948.)

It is interesting to examine the making of public opinion in the matter of the "flying saucer." Public opinion is, of course, not a thing, but the mixture of responses of a number of people to similar or related stimuli. This mixture takes form as a stereotyped, verbalized concept which is, for all practical purposes, a thing and thus used as the basis for action.1 The flying saucer is an excellent subject in that it is almost wholly a manufactured concept, lasting a short period of time and, so, easy to study.  It is, in addition, not too closely tied to the emotional colorations of prejudice and habit which would distort a similar study of opinion on Russia, vivisection, or the home. 

It was of little immediate interest when a pilot in Idaho “saw” a flying saucer. The wire services carried the story, tongue in cheek, and, having little news in the area, kept it alive from day to day with recapitulations of the original. Early the stereotyped concept was suggested; the term “flying saucer” was simple, so homely that everyone could visualize it. It was at once given authority by its appearance in the press. "There must be something to it. I read it in the paper.”2 

Later, we will see, the concept was strengthened by repetition, repetition by variations, “scientific" evidence and speculation, photography, analogy, wit, denial, apology. Newspapers, through juxtaposition, headlining, and suggestion, soon related it to other concepts, to well-established stereotypes and slogans — “the greatest air force in the world" and universal military training to protect "the American way of life" from "the menace of red- Fascism." Other events were soon reported which fitted the general pattern of the first story of early June 1947. A pilot "saw" one of the "what'sits" at 10,000 feet, going at 1,200 mph. When next “seen" the saucers had already acquired common, if vague, attributes of shape, size, speed, and altitude, and in a day or two had added "a blue, fiery tail," or "two tails like a comet." They came out of the West. 

So far there had been only a groping toward a plausible concept, with a gradual elimination of less easily grasped characteristics such as "disintegration," lateral and/or vertical revolution, and a "blister" for the pilot. Seemingly, however, the picture was about complete, for the wire services and editors the country over began to “lay” the story, concentrating all news of the event in one place, featuring the story by headlining and position, dramatizing it through pictures, invoking every “expert" in the land for pontification.

If we take Los Angeles as an example, it is interesting to note the lack of "live" news at the moment. The sensational Overell murder case had become involved in legal technicalities. There had not been for some time a sex crime where the “partially clad body" of a beautiful, young woman had been found.3 At the national level, John L. Lewis had been “good” for several weeks, coming to terms with the big steel companies, and the Russian”front" was still stalemated.

In the week of the saucer story St. Louis was concerned with the threat of flood and Chicago was involved in bitter discussion of rent control, but these were matters of local interest. In most of the nation it was a “ low” week, from an editor's viewpoint.4 

The scarcity of news was thus a large factor in the rapid increase of interest in the story. This increase is shown by a table, based on the Los Angeles Times: 

Date Total Inches   Page One Inches 

July 4  6 

July 5  28 

July 6  92  36 

July 7  136  32 

July 8  95  18 

July 9  57  13 

July 10  8 

Samples of flying saucer headlines

The Los Angeles Herald Express, on July 7, devoted over half the front page to the story, putting it in the same class as V-J Day and the "Black Dahlia" sex murder. The national coverage is somewhat less than the Los Angeles average. The Chicago Sun, not a “yellow" sheet in the usual sense, devoted 194 inches, 60 on the front page, on July 8. The story was displayed with two “end of the world" headlines, an 84-point and a 72-point streamer, both 8 columns.5 This is little less than the V-J Day display. 

The Cleveland Plain Dealer was more representative of the conservative press, with a  peak of 68 inches and a maximum of 18 inches on page one. The St. Louis Post Dispatch, recognized for its sense of news values, did not go above 55 inches, and never displayed the story higher than the fold of the front page. Both papers tended to treat the saucer as a human interest feature and not as news. 

Any such discussion by the press is, of course, a repetition of the concept. Whether the story is based on “ acts" or not, whether it is "true" or not, does not matter; for public opinion is often based not on a thing, measurably objective, but on a picture of a thing, repeated. It is better, perhaps, as Hitler demonstrated with his “big lie,” that the basis of the concept be not easy to demonstrate, allowing for the creative imagination of the teller and the lazy credulity of of the hearer. 

It follows, then, that the use of variation in report is an obvious strengthening factor. The skeptic is deceived by this lack of dogma, saying to himself, “ of course the stories are fantastic, but they have something in common; some common experience produced them." He thus maintains his sense of objectivity and can discuss the matter "rationally." In a sample mass-observation interview 6 it was found that few denied the simple concept, the majority merely attacking details which seemed to weaken the validity of the whole : e.g., “ as big as a five-room house,” "it disintegrated before my eyes." 

Another function of variation is that the individual is not inhibited but can exalt himself by observing some new features of the saucer. The conservative individual, too, is not unduly offended. He may accept the older, “proved” parts of the  concept and reject the new, perhaps more specific in detail.7 
Such repetition, in all its variations, and the endorsement by the authority of the press are the two basic “causes” of public opinion about the flying saucer. Other forces, however, were at work. 

“Scientific" evidence and speculation were soon brought to bear on the subject, strengthening the authority of the press. A “savant" "sees" one and, headlined, achieves authority far beyond that usually invested in a dairy inspector, which he was. Other “experts” report their observations: a meteorologist seems to give credence to the man-made aspect of the phenomena by denying that they are meteors; an engineer, who turns out to be only a pilot, chases one of the objects, discussing it later in terms of a plane spotter, another form of “expert” ; a priest finds something in his back yard, still hot, and takes three days to admit it is a hoax; the FBI, stereotype of accuracy and dependability,  investigates; physicists explain that “all rapidly moving bodies look elliptoid.”

The photographer presents his "factual" evidence, a series of blurs on a negative. Artists reinforce the concept with Buck Rogers pictures. Historians discuss the appearance of saucers in past years — the strange missiles over Sweden in 1946, something in San Francisco a few years ago. The air force admits one “flying wing," which might look like a saucer but it is still on the ground. 

With few exceptions the experts do not say that the discs exist: The spot on the film might be; the drawing could represent; the shape is possible; history has recorded something. In fact, usually buried deep in the story, is the statement or inference that the expert does not credit the stories at all. But the denial is in terms of the things it denies. 

Such denial merely serves to instill the picture more firmly in the public mind For it is obvious that a denial is as much a repetition of the concept as is an affirmation.8 Especially strong is the denial by the air force, so firmly stated that it must conceal “top drawer" secrets. 

Wit, too, is a denial, making homely the unusual. The homely we can accept. Ridicule also strengthens our belief, clearing away our doubts with the acid of emotion.9 So we find the saucer joke, the saucer gag, and clever ridicule working with the "straight news" story to make familiar the unusual. The concept having been fixed, interest in it is maintained at a strategic level by relating it to the public tensions of the moment. One newspaper displayed the story between news of Russian aggression and features on compulsory military training. 

Such juxtaposition is, of course, accidental in most cases, but a glimpse at the less responsible press will show how editors can build tension merely by relating other tensions. Such news as that of the atomic bomb, Russia, and our "shell of an army, a handful of 1,500,000 men" is soon read with eyes "big as saucers." By suggestion the public is led to see dangers which may not in fact exist, for example, the chaos which will result if the discs are part of a "foul plot of the Reds," -who are "out for world domination." By juxtaposition the press can suggest without a grain of evidence. By innuendo concept is related to concept, each reinforcing the other, wheels within wheels.10 The deliberate display techniques used by many papers, three of four in Los Angeles, is sound "journalism" perhaps, if weak logically.

We have seen how the concept was developed, how through repetition and the authority of the press and "experts" it became accepted. The pattern has much in common with the creation of Hitler's "Jew" or the manufacture of a stock "Communist." It is the die by which un-American activity committees mold the stereotype "un-American." It is the blueprint of the unsemantic world  of unreason. 

If, as the President's Commission on Civil Liberties has stated, we are in for a period of ogres, of witch hunts, and of jousting with the straw men built of hate, then it seems wise that we study the method by which they are introduced to the public. It might be useful when someone tries to prepare the way for a man on a White Horse. 

Notes

1 See Sofia/ Distance, a Syllabus, University of Southern California.

2 (Citation missing. Deals with story receiving authority solely due to being covered by the press.)

3 During the short span of the saucer story Los Angeles seems to have solved the problem of the "sex-fiend." Cf. Lincoln Steffens, Autobiography of Lincoln Steffens, p. 285 ff., the chapter entitled, “I Make a Crime Wave." 

4 Papers studied closely include those of Los Angeles, St. Louis, Chicago, New York, Columbus. A quick survey of Atlanta, San Francisco, Dallas, Cleveland, and Cincinnati papers showed no significant differences.

5 72 point equals 1 inch.  

6 Redlands, California, July 10. 

7 Cf. our ideas of "One World," a concept which most accept because it has the authority of age, 8 or 10 years, and because of its generality, which each can interpret. Many, however, reject the details of such a concept, which are its logical projection.

8 "Coca-Cola does not refresh" is almost as effective as "Coca-Cola, the pause that refreshes." Cf. the kidding of product and sponsor on some radio shows. 

9 Cf. the use of wit in anti-Semitism and the deliberate manufacturing of the “darky,"  happy-go-lucky, shiftless. Magazines such as the Saturday Evening Post have well-known formulas for Negro characters. Cf. also the force of ridicule in building the self-stereotype of minority groups as "God's chosen people." 

10 Cf. from the congressional debate on the Atomic Commission : Lilienthal was born in Lithuania; Lithuania is now part of Russia; so, it is suggested but not stated, Lilienthal is a "Red."

About the Author

Herbert Lewis Hackett, 
as a boy in 1929 

At the time of the article, Herbert Lewis Hackett was Assistant Professor of Journalism, Ohio Wesleyan University Delaware, Ohio. He was an instructor in the department of journalism and English, and also taught writing skills training into the framework of an introductory course in sociology. He was the author of several books on writing.

Here's a brief biography by his grandson, Ethan Daniel Davidson:

My grandfather was Herbert Lewis Hackett, born 16 January, 1917, Rangoon, Burma. He ended up back in the States, by the outbreak of WWII. After having earned his PhD in Linguistics from University of Michigan, he was drafted into the Army, commissioned as a Captain, given the assignment of teaching English to German POWs at a camp in Shamrock, Texas. He seems to have gotten into a fight with his CO after hearing of his father's death, and was ultimately discharged; it's my understanding he was a very reluctant conscript anyway. It was while working at the camp that he met the daughter of an itinerant preacher: Sarah Wilborn. Herbert and Sarah moved frequently, as Herbert was a college Professor: Arkansas, Salt Lake, Lansing, Buffalo. Herbert died of a heart attack in Buffalo, 1964.

Herbert L. Hackett, 1957

He didn't seem to have much else to say about UFOs, but used them as an example in his 1957 book on writing clearly, Understanding, and Being Understood:

"Is the report on the facts consistent within itself? This question implies that facts should not contradict themselves. An early report of the flying saucer, for example, stated that it moved at two thousand miles an hour, and that it had a "blister" in which two or three men were observed; yet that speed would make it impossible for an observer to note such details.”

Val Johnson 1979: Prelude to Cash-Landrum?

Val Johnson in a reenactment for That's Incredible!

The Cash-Landrum story is a perplexing case, and a lot of attention is given to Betty Cash's skin problems, which have been mythologized as radiation burns from the UFO. As dramatic as it is, it’s by no means the first instance of UFO “sunburn.” Claims of burns from UFO encounters go way back; some notable early examples are the Sonny Desvergers “Scoutmaster”story, Palm Beach, Florida, 1952, Levelland, Texas, 1957, Loch Raven Dam, Maryland, 1958, and Stefan Michalak, Falcon Lake, 1967. 

It didn’t end there, and reports and rumors of UFO burns became a staple in UFO literature. In 1977 movie Close Encounters of the Third Kind introduced the concept to millions, and was highlighted in the scene where Roy Neary shows his wife his burns from a UFO, and insists that it is not a "moonburn."

Val Johnson

There were other cases shortly before the Cash-Landrum event with UFO burns, some that received nationwide news coverage. The Jerry McAlister UFO sighting on September 11, 1980 has previously been posted here.  His case featured a huge, brilliant UFO that allegedly left the witnesses suffering eye damage and radiation burns.

Before that, a much more famous case featured some details that would be found again in the Cash-Landrum case. On Aug. 27, 1979, Deputy Sheriff Val Johnson was driving  along a lonely road at night, when he saw a blindingly brilliant UFO above the road ahead. Unlike the C-L case, he didn’t stop, and his vehicle collided with the UFO. The car was damaged, and he suffered injuries including “welder’s burns” to his eyes. When help arrived, Johnson was taken to the hospital for an examination and to treat his injuries.  Unlike the C-L case, there was extensive visible damage to his car, and it was preserved as evidence and carefully examined.

That’s Incredible!

There’s another possible connection to the Cash-Landrum case. The popular television show, “That’s Incredible!” debuted in March of 1980 and ran until 1984. It often featured UFO cases, and in its first season they aired a segment on the Val Johnson story. It featured a reenactment of the event, and an appearance by investigator Alan Hendry of the Center for UFO Studies. Johnson was presented as a credible witness, and it showed that his doctor, employer and family stood behind him. 

What was strange, though, was that at the end of the segment, host John Davidson asked Johnson a question out of left field.

“Was it a religious experience for you? 

Many times these events are a religious experience.”

A strange and seemingly scripted question, perhaps to allow Johnson the opportunity to unburden on the topic. The effect was to suggest that UFO sighings are expected to have a religious element.

Vickie Landrum in particular put emphasis on how she initially took the UFO to be the Second Coming. She said, "The Bible says the sky will split and in a rain of fire, Jesus will come." Could the Cash-Landrum witnesses have been influenced by this program, perhaps in how they reported their story? In 1981, they appeared on “That’s Incredible!” themselves.

The rare segment with Val Johnson on “That’s Incredible!” recently surfaced on YouTube. It’s certainly interesting in and of itself, for the insight into his case it provides, and as a bit of UFO history.

For the full story of the Val Johnson case, see this article by Chris Rutkowski:
 The Val Johnson CE2 case of 1979 

Book Review: David Clarke’s How UFOs Conquered the World

David Clarke’s How UFOs Conquered the World: The History of a Modern Myth

David Clarke has a PhD in Folklore. His use of the word “myth” in the the subtitle may scare away some readers, but consider,

"To qualify as myth a story does not need to be true or false, but it must express a conviction held tenaciously by its adherents." 

Tenaciously held? Yes, definitely.

Clarke’s approach is a departure from most UFO books. He’s done a neat trick of arranging the material in such a way that a reader new to the topic can absorb the essential history of UFOs during the course of the narrative. He covers UFO lore in an organic way, introducing it in conversation with non-sequential chunks of it, as it relates to his analysis, personal experience, or the topic at hand. 

Like many UFO buffs, Clarke was indoctrinated into the topic via pop culture entertainment, and developed a lifelong fascination. As an adult, Clarke worked to get the Ministry of Defence to release UFO documents, and once that began, he joined them in the role of external consultant to facilitate the disclosure. His unique relationship to the MOD’s documents are just part of it, though. Just as valuable are his interviews and personal relationships with significant UFO witnesses and researchers, something which allowed him to obtain first-hand testimony.

The book explores the spectrum of UFO philosophies, and the chapter “Angels or Demons?” provides one of the most memorable quotes, one from Father Paul Inglesby: “I once had a huge collection of UFO literature, but I burnt the lot. I decided the whole subject was polluted by evil. You should do the same.” 
Later in the same chapter, Clarke talks about meeting one of his big influences, author John Keel, who revealed that his groundbreaking concepts on the secrets of UFOs were a “literary device.”

Extraterrestrial proponents frequently say that if skeptics would just open their eyes to examine the evidence that they’d come to accept the reality of alien visitation. Clarke has done all that and more, but the ETers are not going to be entirely happy with  his conclusions. However, his examination provides something of interest whether you are skeptical about alien visitation by UFOs or a complete believer. The book will likely challenge your beliefs and understanding at some point. Even if he's wrong about whether ETs are here, his discussion of our ideas about them is valid.

Clarke's book is an interesting examination of the way we use UFOs as a mirror of sorts, on which we project our own beliefs and expectations about the universe around us. By reading it,  the reader will be challenged, and you’ll be introduced to some new ideas, and chances are you'll come away able to put aside some old notions and be encouraged to investigate new possibilities.


How UFOs Conquered the World: The History of a Modern Myth is hardcover, 320 pages from Aurum Press. It contains a glossary, notes and references, bibliography, an index and a color photo section. Ask for it in your local bookstore.

Dr. Richard O’Connor on Putting Away the Roswell Slides

Dr. Richard O’Connor was a guest on an episode of The MUFON UFO Radio show on KGRA 
guest-hosted by Erica Lukes. The topic was the controversy over the Roswell Slides. 

KGRA's MUFON show, courtesy of Race Hobbs. Click to listen.

Dr. Richard O’Connor had written a letter to Linda Moulton Howe shortly after the placard was read, where he said although he had personally confirmed the deblurring of the Slides placard, he felt it did not accurately describe the body in the pictures. He went on to describe features that looked unusual.

https://www.facebook.com/presidentialufo/posts/10206909695605275

Portion of Dr. O’Connor's letter to LMH

On May 24, Jaime Maussan interviewed Dr. O’Connor by Skype where he discussed his views on the body in the Slides. The full interview was posted on YouTube. Whitley Strieber’s Unknown Country used the video as part of this article, “Doctors Agree: Roswell Slides Show a Nonhuman Body”

Although Dr. O’Connor did not participate in the BeWitness event, but he became associated with it after the fact. This was in large part due to him being one of the few people discussing the case that was knowledgeable in medicine and spoke English.  

Getting back to the KGRA show, Dr.  O’Connor was the first guest. He recapped his analysis, but stressed that it was made from (what amounts to) a single picture, a blurry image shot through glass, taken at an angle to the body.

The interviewer mentioned the consequences of the  NPS material released due to the FOIA request by Shepherd Johnson, to which Dr. O’Connor replied, 

“Yeah, I’ve just, over the past 48 hours more or less, been looking at that, and it seems to me like it's drawing us toward the conclusion that in fact is this photograph probably does represent a native American child. There were some, a couple of photographs in the last pages of that set of documents, one of them in particular on page 176, and in my opinion it really does show a different photograph of what is very likely the same child.”

Tom Carey on life after the Slides

Maussan interviewing Carey prior to BeWitness 

Tom Carey had been on another KGRA show June 2 with Don Schmitt, and at that time he was challenging the reading of the placard, and all that it meant. On this show, Tom Carey appeared to have absorbed and accepted, or is in the process of accepting the facts. He was not asked about whether he’s changed his mind on the Slides, but in the discussion it sounds like he's come to the realization that the Slides are not "what we believed we had..." He talks about things in the past tense. 

In talking about the material gathered for the BeWitness presentation, “that was our conclusion... what we knew up to that point..” Of the placard being read he says, “a day or two later, this bombshell hits about it being a mummified two-year-old boy. Well, talk about a right cross, or a left hook. He also seems to feel betrayed by two of the people who he’d asked to help with the placard have since “joined our critics.” Of the critics, he said he’d have worked with them, “had they been civil. In the opening, he mentioned having plenty to keep him busy, a new book coming out with Don Schmitt, and another one planned beyond that, but first up is their appearance at the annual Roswell Festival. Perhaps he’s putting the Slides behind him, returning to fundamental Roswell research.

Jaime Maussan from BeWitness

To finish discussing the show, I should mention that Jamie Maussan was the featured guest, and the last hour was devoted solely to him. He maintains that the Slides are genuine and the other photos do not seem to match it, and even if they do, the body is abnormal, possibly the that of an alien being, one of the “Sky People” of native American legend. He rejects the new evidence, and continues to defend the Slides.

Call with Dr. Richard O'Connor, Wednesday, June 17 

After the show, I was interested in finding more about about Dr. O’Connor’s change of position on the topic. I found his information at the Jesse A. Marcel Library and sent him a note, and to my surprise he invited me to call him instead. I found Dr. O’Connor to friendly, knowledgable, and  was impressed with his candor and swift willingness to revise his conclusions in the face of more information and evidence.

Dr. Richard O’Connor

He told me that looking at a photograph is fraught with pitfalls, and mentioned the fact that the quality of the Slides photograph was not very good, the details were not clear due to the blurry photograph, which was taken at an angle from the body (and possibly distorted by the glass in the case). 

There were some characteristics that he still didn't quite understand, like the condition of the chest cavity, but it occurred to him that the terraced cliffs of Montezuma Castle must have caused the deaths of a number of children from falling off the ledges. He wondered if that could have accounted for the injuries to the child's body, particularly the damage to the head and the fractured femur. I pointed out the the shallow grave may have accounted for some of this, particularly the loss of the lower leg. (I thought later that the excavation by amateur archeologists could also be a factor.) 

The cliff dwellings of Montezuma Castle

He stated that after he looked photo in the National Park Service FOIA documents, that the  “there’s no way that’s not the same being,” and that the body in the Slides was a Native American child,  the “only conclusion.” He thinks that this absolutely proves that the Slides had nothing to do with Roswell and that that the matter is closed. 

“there’s no way that’s not the same being”

He thinks the lesson is to be learned from this, that if you have some extraordinary evidence, that putting it out for an open-source examination was the way to get results In this instance, it didn't take long for many people working together to determine the truth, and that by sharing information it's a more efficient means of reaching the truth.

As for the Slides and the BeWitness show, he personally does not feel it was a scam, and that the people involved were sincerely acting on the information they had available to them at the time.  We discussed how the limitations imposed by the Slidebox Media non-disclosure agreement had prevented the sharing of the information. He said by holding back the information, it hindered the discovery of the truth.

He went on to say that the Maussan had made a good presentation in other respects than the Slides, and felt there was value to the discussion of the historical Roswell case and presentation of witness statements.  About the Roswell Slides, he also said the evidence shows it was an archaeological finding. Unless there’s a body can be examined, the case is completed. Otherwise, it is just speculation from a photograph alone. He won't say a negative word against Maussan or anyone involved, but can't figure why Jaime is hanging on in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Facing the Future

Dr. O’Connor thinks this is finished, but that he’s still optimistic about the study of UFOs and the Roswell case. O’Connor worked alongside Jesse Marcel Junior for a great number of years and was convinced by the experiences that he shared, as well as the testimony of other witnesses. He’s sure of the reality of the Roswell event  and that UFOs are visitors from outside our planet, and that they are worthy of study.

He’d like the reputation of the UFO topic to improve so that more scientists would be attracted and become involved. He also thinks that the average person is unaware of the genuine nature of things, and that with better education on the topic, support could be given to properly fund the scientific investigation of UFOs. He’s convinced that would to some conclusions and developments to help answer the questions and provide some understanding.

The Placard of the Roswell Slides: The Final Curtain

Special Rush report from The Roswell Slides Research Group


The Roswell Slides second biggest mystery was the content of the placard on the alleged alien body.

Several statements were made about it, some contradictory:

The Roswell Slides and the Truth by Anthony Bragalia

This ‘placard’ is not very evident in the video grab image. However, it has been enlarged by experts and the writing, in red ink, is handwritten, not typed, as would be found in a biological display in a museum.

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-roswell-slides-update-by-tony.html

Tom Carey was interviewed about the Roswell Slides on the March 22, 2015 episode of Jaime Maussan’s Contacto on Tercer Milenio TV. Carey said that experts have been able to read some words on the placard on the case and that, “debunkers will be disappointed.”

The Conspiracy Show With Richard Syrett Apr 12, 2015

Tom Carey and Don Schmitt were interviewed, of the show's expert presentations, Schmitt said: 

This will be part of the event, part of the program in May, that all of these analytical reports, all of the analyses, all of the main experts as well as the photographic experts who examined- there’s a placard, very fuzzy, that can not be legibly read by the naked eye, yet we’ve had everyone from Dr. David Rudiak, to Studio MacBeth, even the Photo Interpretation Department of the Pentagon, as well as Adobe have all told us that it’s beyond the pale, that it cannot be read, it is totally up to interpretation. 

So, we truly feel we have performed due diligence; we have done everything we can to substantiate and prove what is contained within these slides, whether it is something of a human malady or something truly extraordinary. https://youtu.be/fQyAVrFnTos?t=1h24m2s

During BeWitness, it was announced that despite the work of a number of experts, the placard could absolutely not be read. 

In the second slide the placard was visible, and the writing was evident, if unclear.

News coverage, claiming the placard could not be read,

"We couldn't make anything clearly out of the placard... several others, who did not have much luck." - Adam Dew

"Nobody could read anything decisively in the placard, unfortunately. I am sure people will make attempts to do this going forward...." - Adam Dew

He was right, and most of the placard has now been read.

A member of The Roswell Slides Research Team used a newly acquired source image of the placard seen in front of the body. By manipulating the commercial software, SmartDeblur, he managed to significantly clear up the blurred text. Other members offered suggestions and helped narrow down the actual words.

Nab Lator deblurred the placard image.

Chris Isbert created an animated GIF to display the text.
http://s263.photobucket.com/user/europa73/media/macmini_1_zpsib9x40yc.gif.html

The first line was the most clearly resolved:

MUMMIFIED BODY OF TWO YEAR OLD BOY

There is little doubt that this is the true and correct text. The other 3 lines of the text are somewhat hard to read, some words more clear than others. The original results yielded:

MUMMIFIED BODY OF TWO YEAR OLD BOY

At the time of burial the body was clothed in a xxx-xxx cotton

shirt. Burial wrappings consisted of these small cotton blankets.

Loaned by the Mr. Xxxxxx, San Francisco, California

The entire effort only took hours, quite a difference from the claimed “years” of research that the Slides promoters camp claimed. Because the Slide hucksters haven’t released proper high resolution scans of the slides, our work was made more difficult. We could probably get clearer results from better images.

The mystery of the placard is solved, and so is the nature of the body in the case.

A boy, from Earth. 

The question then, becomes, how was this not discovered by the experts examining the case in the years of investigation?

Subsequent information filled in the missing placard letters. 

Mesa Verde Notes September 1938 Volume VIII, Number 1.

---

MUMMIFIED BODY OF TWO YEAR OLD BOY

At the time of burial the body was clothed in a slip-over cotton 

shirt. Burial wrappings consisted of three small cotton blankets. 

Loaned by Mr. S. L. Palmer, San Francisco, California.

The Roswell Slides Research Group

José Antonio Caravaca, Spain
Isaac Koi, UK
Nab Lator, France
Lance Moody, USA

Tim Printy, USA

Curt Collins, USA

Tim Hebert, USA

Paul Kimball, Canada

Gilles Fernandez, France

Trained Observer, USA

Chris Rutkowski, Canada

Roger Glassel, Sweden

S. Miles Lewis, USA

Thanks to our colleagues and associates, including Alejandro Espino (for the 
Israel Ampuero team, Spain), Philippe Hernandez, Jeff Ritzmann, Aaron J Gulyas, Irna France, Nick Redfern, Fin Handley and many, many more who provided help.