Thursday, June 23, 2005

One more (?) quick point about the AA that pounds the final nail in the coffin of those who think we're seeing mere special effects: Progeria shrinks subdermal fat tissue. This explains why the corpse being dissected has a conspicuous lack of it. Those straining to believe that the AA shows either a dummy or a dead alien have cited this as evidence that the being's internal structure is nonhuman, along with the apparent lack of nipples and navel (also explained by progeria).

Hopefully this will conclude my "alien autopsy" posts. Sorry if this got a little tedious. But my only real regret is that the UFO community -- of which I suppose I'm a part -- wasn't willing to "dig" into the progeria explanation as soon as it suggested itself. Sure, it was offered as a possibility, but discussion was limited and superficial; the overarching need to relegate the AA to special effects stunted the sort of dialogue just now materializing.

This is doubly embarrassing since the AA provides a possible link with Roswell, which is roundly considered one of most important UFO events of all time. If not for Nick Redfern's research, the AA would still exist in theoretical limbo. Instead, it now stands a fair chance of providing a vital piece of the puzzle to the events of the summer of 1947.
Posted by at

17 comments:

Mac said...

Give it a rest, Dante.

11:02 PM
RJU said...

I kind of agree with Dante's conclusion: the only important question then becomes was it hoaxed by the government as disinformation of was it hoaxed by private individuals for profit?

The hoaxers appear to have been trying to tie the hoax to the Roswell incident, but if it is a hoax, it would seem that it would not tell us anything either way about the true nature of what might have happened near Roswell in 1947.

11:25 PM
Mac said...

you are talking like you have conclsively proved something when you have only really convinced yourself of your own wild speculation.

I haven't convinced myself of anything. I think progeria is the best explanation for what we see in the film, wherever it comes from.

You're a typical debunker who demands "extraordinary evidence," but chooses to retain the right of deciding what constitutes
"extraordinary." You keep moving the goal-post on me. Nothing I post is good enough, even if it satisfies your original demand.

The fact that you and one german doctor think that it sort of looks like someone with progeria (and there are many others who disagree) is not proof of anything.

It's not "proof." But it's excellent circumstantial evidence.

you say it is "almost certainly a human being". do you really stand by a statement like that?

Certainly. I'm not committing myself, but that's what the evidence suggests. Am I supposed to issue some sort of apology?

anyway- what does it really matter if the hoax was filmed with a rubber doll or a deceased human, beyond disrespecting the dead?

Wait a second. You just got done demanding evidence and berating me. Evidently this was important enough to you to flood the comments section. But now that I've countered your detractions it doesn't "really matter"?

the only important question then becomes was it hoaxed by the government as disinformation of was it hoaxed by private individuals for profit?

Oy! Have you even read my posts? I've answered your questions and it's not good enough. Your mind is obviously made up. Mine's not, but I have good reason to think the AA depicts a human corpse. Until something new happens, I simply don't have time to "debate" with you, because you're changing the rules as you go along.

11:33 PM
Mac said...

RJU and Dante--

It is an important question. That's why I devoted a somewhat lengthy post to the various hoax possibilities:

http://posthumanblues.blogspot.com/2005/06/so-alien-in-autopsy-film-is-almost.html

11:38 PM
Mitch said...

nice blog... 'bout aliens, UFO's etc...very interesting huh!

11:40 PM
Mac said...

Glad you like it!

11:43 PM
Mac said...

I think we can assume that if it is a progeria corpse, then the reason is that it is meant to pass as an alien.

An why, pray tell, are we "assuming" this? The whole point of my looking into this mystery (in the context of what Redfern has discovered) was to see what the autopsy really is, freed of the usual assumptions.

I've argued that the footage was "repurposed" as supposed evidence of crashed aliens in 1995, when Roswell was a big commercial issue and that the footage itself might represent something altogether darker.

It's abundantly obvious you've neither taken a look at Nick Redfern's evidence -- which is nothing less than chilling -- nor understood a word I'm saying.

11:51 PM
RJU said...

I think this is an interesting subject. Here is another scenario that might explain the AA film: Some medical students witness the death of a progeria patient. Over some beers they talk about how much this person looked like some of the depictions of aliens they have seen. One of them suggests it would be great fun to unbury the patient and practice their new autopsy skills while making a film linking the autopsy to the Roswell reports. They later steal into a graveyard, unbury the victirm, make the film and get a hearty laugh everytime they hear or read any mention of the film.

This makes more sense to me than any "for profit" hoax- I can't see much money in this. It also makes a whole lot more sense than imagining any progeria victims were the test pilots for experimental aircraft or that the hoax is a disinformation campaign by the government. I don't contest the possiblily humans might have been used as radiation test subjects, but it seems really far-fetched to imagine any of them ended up lying dead on a ranch, not far from Roswell, N.M. In fact, we know there were many unwitting radiation test subjects; soldiers who were sent to close to observe many of the early atomic test sites. If people were used in radiation experiments does anyone really believe they would chose someone suffering from a serious disorder like progeria? It would make more sense to chose someone without any abnormalities, in order to properly assess what the effects of radiation might be on a normal person.

8:55 AM
Mac said...

Saga,

This looks like a reasonably "healthy" individual to me (by progeria standards). But I would have to agree with WMB that the sense of muscle tone is superficial and compounded by the body's bloated nature.

More investigation is called for. I would especially like to see the second autopsy that was never shown to the general public, since this could possibly confirm or refute the progeria hypothesis.


Dante,

Thanks for the rudeness. Personal attacks are, of course, the last resort of those with an emotional ax to grind. Please feel free to stop posting here; I recommend taking your wisdom to the UFO UpDates list.

10:34 PM
Carol Maltby said...

"With the 'old children,' the subdermal fatty tissue shrinks. Their skin is tight and stretched like plastic wrap. In this way, progeria makes it appear that the navel is missing. 'It's like an umbrella,' declared Jansen, 'when I open it, all the folds disappear.'"

I'd like to point out that in late pregnancy, when the abdominal skin is stretched tight over a bloated belly, one of the odd things that most pregnancy books don't mention is the way an "innie" navel pops out to be an "outie." It's by no means missing, just turned inside out.

11:28 PM
Mac said...

Re. "muscle tone": Progeria causes the skin to "wilt" and shrink, which has the effect of highlighting the underlying musculature. I think this accounts for much of the apparent muscle tone in the AA.

1:29 AM
Kyle said...

A note to WM Bear,

Rigor mortis is a temporary effect of death. It lasts a very short time. Talk to a funeral home worker or a medical examiner...or just read up on it.

Look it up...and then learn to think.

Kyle
uforeflections.blogspot.com

3:45 PM
Mac said...

If this is an experimental test subject we're seeing, then I think it's extremely likely it would have been dissected very shortly after death to assess the effects of the experiment on living tissue as accurately as possible.

4:05 PM
Kyle said...

Mr. Bear,

I sincerely apologize for any slight you perceive. I was simply responding to your post in the manner I observed in the post to which I was replying.

As for being rude, I cannot but agree that if you feel that way, I am responsible. As for being snotty or any other adjective...no...pejorative...you may wish to hurl reveals little more than your ignorance, unless we've met before.

I meant no offense, I just tend to use the vernacular and tone of the person I'm addressing. If you foudn me rude, perhaps a little introspection is in order.

Respectfully,

Kyle

6:16 PM
Kyle said...

WM Bear,

You are right that rigor sets in within hours of death...sometimes up to 24 hours depending on the conditions at death.

You are correct also that rigor can last up to 72 hours.

My point was that once it is gone it is gone. In the AA film, the limbs are flexible. Rigor doen's make the corpse "hard", but it locks the joints tight, such that lifting a limb will lift the entire body. The fact that the leg is lifted off the table, but the rest of the body stays put indicates that the hip joint flexed to allow such movement of the leg. This movement is completely inconsistent with rigor. Of course, if the corpse is a model, this is all moot.

Hence my note that rigor is temporary, and not subject to coming and going.

On another note, I think one must tread very carefully in analyzing the thesis that the AA film was a hoax, if ny hoax you mean that the corpse was not ET, but a hapless victim of military/scientific atrocities.

I am of the opinion that the film was a hoax to fuel Roswell discussion, and reflects a fairly poorly realized corpse. The accompanying footage of the UFO control panels, etc, does little to support the government cover-up IMO, because there would be no reason to fake such scenes if the intent was to tell the public that the corpse was an alien. It was not necessary to film the tent scenes, since most Americans of the period did not believe the government would lie. They would have accepted the alien story with the AA film alone. It would have been quite shocking and effective if it had been released to the public contemporaneously with the Roswell incident.

If the thesis is that the cover-up was done more recently, to dissuade a deeper look into the Roswell case, the artifacts would have looked much more convincingly "advanced". The control panels look rather "cheesy" to me, and always have.

Surely alien technology would not require an anatomical component for its operation. We have been on a steady evolution toward technology being made for anyone to use...amputees, handicapped, etc. It strains credibility to think that an alien race as capable as Roswell requires (getting to Earth from somehwere far, far away) would have control mechanisms that actually required a particular hand and finger size, and required that each digit be fully functional. We wouldn't do that, and we're the primitives here.

I could certainly be wrong, however.

Kyle
uforeflections.blogspot.com

PS to WM Bear...no offense...sincerely. And I applaud your research on rigor. You learned and then you thought... :)

6:32 PM
Mac said...

I highly recommend watching the autopsy in its unedited entirety.

10:53 PM
Kyle said...

WM Bear,

If you e-mail me, I can perhaps arrange a copy of the unedited footage for your review.

Information is power...

Kyle
kyle@kyleking.com

3:08 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)