Friday, May 8, 2015


Even as the excitement has been building over the unveiling of the so-called "Roswell Slides" in Mexico City on May 5, a group calling itself the Roswell Slides Research Group has been quietly investigating them. This was, of course, difficult to do, given that the slides had never been released, and never publicly shown. Only a very low-resolution version of each slide had leaked out, enough to fuel speculation about it but without enough detail to really investigate.
Now that a high(er)-resolution copy of the slide has been obtained, the group has used the de-blurring program Smart Deblur, which has cleared up the photo's blur amazingly well, enabling us to read much, even most, of the text. We now know exactly what the top line of the placard says:

There is now no doubt whatsoever that the "Roswell alien" is, in fact, the mummy of a child, exactly as many researchers suggested. Of course, Jaime Maussan, who orchestrated the Mexico City extravaganza, insisted that it could not be a mummy, and far too many people believed him. Here is an animated GIF version to help you read the letters: 

Curt Collins, one of the members of the Roswell Slides Research Group, released this information on behalf of the team today on his Blog Blue Blurry Lines. His reading of the text on the placard is:
          At the time of burial the body was clothed in a xxx-xxx cotton
          shirt. Burial wrappings consisted of these small cotton blankets.
          Last line: Xxxxxed by the X.I. Xxxxxx, San Francisco, California.
Researcher Ted Molczan suggests that the first word on the last line is "Donated," and the word before "San Francisco" is "Museum," which is very likely correct. Speaking of the Roswell Slides Research Group, Molczan makes the observation, "You folks solved in no more than 2-3 days what the promoters claimed not to have been able to solve in 3 years!" 
The Smart Deblur program has been available at least since 2012, so there is no reason that the "Roswell Slides" promoters could not have done the same thing long ago. They, after all, had the high-resolution scans all along. But one suspects that the promoters did not want to find out what really was on the slides - that would have destroyed its presumed commercial value. Proving, beyond a shadow of any doubt, that everyone on the team promoting the "Roswell Slides" is either a scoundrel, a fool, or both.

The supposed "Roswell alien," with its incriminating placard - that was apparently deliberately blanked out in this
image that was shown in Mexico City!
Shortly after the deciphered placard was posted by Curt Collins, and people began asking exactly where did it come from - was it authentic? - the slides owner Adam Dew posted an image of the blurred placard on his site. Apparently he was trying to "come clean" about the placard that Maussan had blanked out, to minimize the damage to his own reputation.


  1. This was so fun to watch unfold. The exact opposite of the way that the slides hucksters (and many UFO "researchers" work). We all shared ideas and techniques--most of the work was done by one brilliant member (and we are not sure at this time if he wants to be credited).


  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. This demonstrates several things about the Roswell slides research. We were told that four different experts tried to read the placard and could not. That means:
    1) The did not think of using software designed to deblur the image
    2) They were given scans that could not be read.

    There were two slides. It appears that one can be read and the other can not. I am under the impression that Rudiak got one scan to read and not both. Were the four experts given the scan that could not be read? Is this just an honest error by Dew and his organization or was it deliberate? If it was deliberate, what else was Dew trying to do to give everyone the impression that this was an alien? Is it possible the whole back story (which had no proof but anecdotes) about the slides and the Rays was simply made up? All of these questions need to be answered. While the Roswell slides have been resolved by a group that a certain Roswell promoter called "Laughable" (look who's laughing now!), there are things that need to be resolved regarding what we were told and what the truth really is.

    1. From now on, the investigation of the "Roswell Slides" will not be about the slides themselves, but instead about those who promoted them.

      And the questions will be along the lines of "what did they know, and when did they know it?"

    2. I have a suspicion that Dew is trolling people. The IMDB page for the film lists it as a comedy, Dew is not listed as one of the film makers, and there are other small red flags too. Is it possible that the 'dream team' only ever saw the low-res scan, were promised higher versions, but were so credulous they never bothered to look further? Maybe they got sold a story and then sold it to everyone else...

      My next step if I were involved, would be to take a look at Dew's own claims, including his background.

    3. Hmm... seems my suspicions are confirmed regarding at least one person not seeing full scans before promoting them:

      The slow leak seems to be Dew's intentions not anyone else's.

  4. I think at the very least it's safe to say that the credibility of anyone who agreed to participate in any way in the May 5th event is forever shredded.

  5. Paul, if we don't allow researchers to choose whether to gamble on authenticity and participate, then we stand the risk of a genuine case being overlooked.
    UFO research needs people to jump into the deep water just in case there's something there as well as those who work diligently on the sidelines as has happened in this case.
    If this has turned out to be genuine, people like Dolan would be applauded for agreeing to at least listen to what was being claimed.
    If some UFO cases you have included in your documentary films turned out to be hoaxes - that wouldn't mean your reputation would be shredded.

    1. The problem with this "ignore the obvious" apology is that any rational adult with normal eyesight could have looked at the slides and known it was a mummy three years ago--just as most of us easily did three months ago with the leaked slide.

      And they almost certainly did. It's just that there's no money to be made with two slides of an ordinary mummy but there is in hyping "Roswell slides" as an extraordinary piece of evidence that something real and otherworldly crashed in NM in 1947.

      But the slides have absolutely nothing to do with the Roswell myth or the "UFO" myth generally--just frauds making money. Is that what you think passes for "'UFO' research," one hoax after another? The very idea is absurd, researching fairy tales.

      They're all just "UFO" conspiracy-mongering hacks for money.

      Wake Up!

      Just once I'd like to see a "genuine case." That's funny!

    2. I'd say the issue isn't that they took a risk - the issue is they didn't look into it scientifically. Let's face it, if they'd bothered to document their findings and publish it, it would never have passed peer review. Much like most of 'science by press release'. Actual science is done with an open mind yes, but also with checks and balances so mistakes and bias get caught beforehand. If they were really researchers they'd apply a little more methodological rigour to what they do.

    3. Is there any Attorney launching a Class Action Laws Suit? This is Clearly fraud for financial Gain, 6,000 tickets sold at $350 each? This is a Crime and thousands more paying $20.00 each in Pay View? If I had paid by Credit Card or PayPal I would be filing a Dispute. These people need to go to Jail for this shit.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. Roger, that placard is blown up from a tiny slide that was moving causing a blurring on the picture. Not so catastrophic on large objects, but rough on text, producing overlapping letters with a sort of tracer. And, yeah, it can sorta look like calligraphy or something due to pareidolia, which I can neither spell or pronounce.

    2. Also because placards, like newspaper headlines, sometimes omit function words like "a" or "the":

      "Sarasota County Sheriff's Office investigating death of two year-old boy"

  7. LOL. Richard Dolan has ruined himself through his defense of these slides.

  8. There's a difference between being a filmmaker who presents the views of others, and someone who stands on stage with known liars and lends his name to an event where people are charged money to attend. If you can't see that, I don't know what else to say.

  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

  10. The burden of proof has been met. We have deblurred Adam Dew's image.

  11. I am a little confused. I've only seen a high res version of one of the slides -- and that one has *no* readable text on the placard. Let's call it the "woman" slide because there's a woman in a blue dress behind the mummy. So I'm wondering:

    - Has a high res version of the other slide (let's call it the "man" slide because there's a man standing at the extreme right edge of the image) been released? Where?

    - And why is the text in the "man" slide so obvious, when there appears to be no readable text in the "woman" slide? The version of the "woman" slide I have seen looks like the placard might be overexposed, yet to my eye the low res photos look similar in every other respect in terms of exposure. Was the "woman" slide manipulated in some way before it was released?

  12. A very good question Scott. I can't answer that because I don't have the original slides. Only one person has them and he has been less than open with everyone. In fact, he has referred to us as internet trolls. Probably because he is going to lose a lot of money he invested in his Kodachrome film. Had he come to the skeptics first, he could have saved himself the trouble but those dollar signs just looked too big.

  13. Slidebox Media is now claiming the deblurred photo has been photoshopped. See:

    1. That would be a lie. Nothing new there - that's the pattern that is emerging with the promoters.

  14. Old news from about 18 hours ago. This inspired Dew to reveal the actual scan (not some version that we had acquired from a source). Because of some adjustments that were done to the image by Dew (or somebody in his group), it took a while but our #1 guy created a deblur model that cut through the bluriness and confirmed our work with the other image:

  15. Wait..."UFO Researchers" in a hoax? Imagine that. Seriously...there are tens of millions of people on Earth right now with a video recording device that they carry 24/7, and we still don't have any photos of UFO's that aren't blurry blobs. Oh, wait...the aliens have a special camera disruptive device. Hucksters and con artists.

  16. Anthony Bragalia has now joined the 'side of the mummy,' and has issued an apology for his previous behavior:

    In fact, he seems to have identified the specific mummy that the photo shows. It was a Native American child mummy in Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado: "A splendid mummy was received by the Park Museum recently when Mr. S.L. Palmer Jr. of San Francisco returned one that his father had taken from the ruins in 1894. The mummy is that of a two year old boy and is in an excellent state of preservation. At the time of burial the body was clad in a slip-over cotton shirt and three small cotton blankets. Fragments of these are still on the mummy."

    1. His "apology" should be directed at those of us he has repeatedly defamed since this all began, as well as to all the people who paid to see the Mexico City con job. When he's done, he should also apologize for one of the worst mea culpas I've ever seen. Then we can all sit back and ask ourselves whether he really just discovered this mummy story... or whether he's known about it all along and is now releasing it to try and make it look like he's clean in all of this.

      Or maybe it would be better if we all just ignored him from now on. After all, who cares what Anthony Bragalia thinks now? Events have passed him by.

    2. But. But. Edgar Mitchell like totally thinks "They're certainly not human". And he's like an astronaut.

      Anyone get a comment from this self described expert on what the bodies of dessicated children are supposed to look like?

  17. I don't see this as an apology for his personal behavior. It was an apology for being on the wrong side of "truth and history". There was no public, or for that matter private, apologies for his behavior towards members of the RSRG. We were called liars, alcoholics, lacking in moral compass, and hoaxers among many things. We were even threatened with legal action by lawyers/local police and having our families harassed. I did not take such threats seriously but they were still made. I don't foresee any such apology occurring.

  18. He certainly admitted being a bit of a dupe, but then tried to excuse himself a little by pointing out a number of "incredible but true coincidences" involved in the slides tale. None of them look incredible to me, and most are not even coincidences. Still, his admission is at least something, whereas the other two or three persons involved have kept their silence.

  19. I'm glad Anthony made the apology at least. I'm glad his apology mentions that 'sceptics didn't fake anything'.
    With such a build-up, so much damage is done.
    Not everyone follows these things. I met someone last week who still thinks that the Alien Autopsy was real. I've spoken with others who declare belief in the 'Roswell crash' but who's scant knowledge of the case is mostly about the plains crash, Bennet, Anderson and such like. So much belief is created, trash publications and proponent books, but so few will learn of what good investigation has produced on the subject.
    Things long ago disproved or at least shown to be far different than first claimed will stay in the form of the original claim in most people's mind.
    What a shame.

    All the best, folks,

  20. I wonder how Mr Antony Bragalia immediately pointed to a Mesa Verde National Park Museum child-mummy, when writing his ironic "apology" to the Native American Indians?

    First of all, it seems that the caves at Mesa Verde have produced several "naturally ocurring" mummies like their famous "Esther." However, the child-mummy depicted in the slides had the intestinal cavity emptied and seems to fit more closely the Egyptian mummification methods. So, I think it's in order to request that Mr Bragalia shows us the photograph of this child-mummy at the Mesa Verde National Park Museum.

    There are a few scholarly articles in Anthropology detailing why there is a very close match between the image in the Roswell slides and the child-mummy from Thebes. I for one, completed my own comparison and believe there is a very close match. Therefore, I would like to see the Mesa Verde mummy in it's museum case! Together with the "Ape Mask" behind it and the other artifacts!

    Why would the Mesa Verde Museum display their child-mummy in such Company? In addition, the woman in blue dress behind the glass case appears in another slide in a Museum where a large ship-model is displayed. Is this also the same Mesa Verde Museum?

    It's disturbing to see how little respect for the public these "super-UFO-advocates" seem to have. Who gave them such untouchable status, so as to try to dismiss our natural upset without a proper documentation of what and why actually transpired in trying to pull-off their now infamous "Kodachrome Hoax!"

  21. BTW, Mr Bragalia had actively denied ANY possibility that the slides depicted a mummy! In his now deleted post, he goes on about why and how it was impossible for such confusion to exist! Now, after we know the truth, in one second Mr Bragalia knew exactly which mummy the slides depicted?

    Just a moment, please! Let's get to the bottom of this cruel hoax!

  22. Dear Senior Maussan,
    Just a Thank You note to say “Adios!” for the wonderful Roswell Alien Slide Show you hosted on Cinco Da Mayo. Presenting a mummified little kid for a dead space alien was pure entertainment in my book.
    It was also my first visit to Mexico and I had a “vunderbar” time!

    Anyhow, the real reason for this note is that I need your help.
    I wanted to know if you possibly found a kitchen item I left at your show.
    I lost my shopping bag that contained a handheld “Smoking Gun Food Smoker”. I heard it works great on steaks, fish, and breakfast cereals.
    (You can buy it cheaper in Mexico than USA, around $2 Euro)

    Here’s what happened. During the show I left my seat (a speaker wearing a beret was yammering on about parallel universes - I already know that stuff!) to go get popcorn. When I came back to my seat my shopping bag AND the Smoking Gun was missing.

    I asked the man sitting next to me to watch my bag when I left for popcorn.
    He was wearing a Star Trek costume (Classic Trek not New Generation).
    Did you see him in the audience? (Maybe he stole my Smoking Gun???)

    After the show did you happen to find my Smoking Gun item?


  23. Repost with a few revisions
    José Antonio Caravaca
    Isaac Koi
    Nab Lator
    Lance Moody
    Tim Printy
    Curt Collins
    Tim Hebert
    Paul Kimball
    Gilles Fernandez
    Trained Observer
    Chris Rutkowski
    Roger Glassel
    S. Miles Lewis
    Jeff Ritzmann and many others!

  24. I'm new to all of this, but I found it absolutely fascinating - how does something that should be the biggest news to hit the circuit since news itself became a thing get relegated to a small event in Mexico? And if its leaning that badly towards being a disappointment (with Senor Maussan's history in mind), how can all of these people who have invested so much of their personal and professional lives in this all for it - *again*!?

    Crazy, but I enjoyed this saga and looking back at some of your older posts as well, Robert. Great work on all of it - consider me a new fan!

  25. Any thought that these con artists are really in it for the 'truth' is dispelled by the way they play these events off. It's like the previews for a summer blockbuster film, and the goal is the same- make lotsa money.

    If they were honest about such findings, the first step would be to invite scientists and researchers from all over to examine the evidence and tear it apart, if possible.

    Well, they keep getting rich from UFOlogy. Maybe we're in the wrong business.

    1. No doubt at all in my mind it was a preplanned hoax and deception.


Keep your comments relevant, and keep them civil! That means no personal attacks will be allowed, by anyone, on anyone. Commenters are welcome to disagree with me, or with other comments, but state your arguments using logic, and with a civil tone. Comments in violation of these rules will be deleted, and offenders banned.

Comments should be in English, although quotes from foreign-language sources are fine as long as they're relevant, and you explain them. Anonymous postings are not permitted. If you don't want to use your real name, then make up a name for yourself, and use it consistently.