Wednesday, May 6, 2015

The Great "Roswell Slides" Extravaganza - Social Media Pans It!

I was unwilling to drop any money into the coffers of the scoundrels hyping the bogus "Roswell Slides" in Mexico City. Jaime Maussan, promoter of the event, is notorious for his promotion of bogus photos and videos of UFOs, alien creatures, and other absurdities, such as a photo of a flying horse. The website for the Mexican UFO research group (in Spanish) lists "more than 40 frauds" that Maussan has promoted. However, being curious to see what was happening, I followed the event on Twitter, #RoswellSlides. It occurred to me that the best way to describe the event would be to simply share some of the comments being made by those watching it.

One of the slides, from Twitter. Probably the sign reads something like, "Dead alien from Zeta Reticuli.
Don't tell anyone about this! It's Top Secret!"

 @SpatzieLover posted many good comments and photos describing the show. Former Apollo astronaut Edgar Mitchell, a promised speaker, was a no-show. He appeared via video link, saying that his age of 84 made it difficult to travel.
  • Former Astronaut Edgar Mitchell saying we don't know what beings or plants are in the universe
  • Our planet is just one grain of sand on a huge beach
  • Edgar seeing the images says "They're certainly not human - looks like what the little greys look like" [as if he would know for certain what little grays look like]
She also had a good summary of what the ninety-year old military veteran Eleazar N. Benavides said (referred to as "Pfc. Benjamin" in Schmitt and Carey's book Witness to Roswell, incorrectly described by slides owner Adam Dew as a Lieutenant), who supposedly saw a real alien at Roswell in 1947:
  • "They didn't resemble none of us...they appear quite strange" Details of #ETs from vet.  Short & hairless.   
  • Discussing arms/elbows/face being unusual. He tried not to look hard, concerned for future
  • Confirms this is what he saw in 1947. Says photo looks like after #ET deceased for a while
  • One's he saw were plumper, "a little more body" had more fat/tissue than this deceased one [as if we didn't know that a recent corpse would be plumper than a dessicated body whose head fell off]

  • "Events" like this are likely on top of the list of reasons why there is no open contact by any intelligent alien species
Paul Kimball (@paulkimballfilm) posted this photo of slides promoters Donald Schmitt and Tom Carey, with the
comment, "Two con men hard at work simply repeating the same tall tales they have been telling for decades."

@DanPHodges posted this photo, with the comment
"Dolan not doing his credability any good by sharing a stage with known liars."
  • Maybe I've just been doing this a long time, I feel safe in saying these are some of the worst real alien photos I've seen
  • #roswellslides A photo of a child mummy, an #epicfail NOT a smoking gun. Shame on ufologists that was on THIS.
  • i feel so sorry for anybody that payed good money to see #Roswellslides can't believe @RichDolan was a part of this joke.
The celebrated Nick Pope, @nickpopemod, tried to emphasise the humor of the situation:
  • Underwhelmed by #roswellslides - having seen dead aliens when I ran the MoD's UFO project, I can tell you that's not what they look like :-) 
  • As the most junior member of Majestic 12 I always get the jobs that none of my fellow conspirators want, like debunking the #roswellslides
Comparing the Roswell Slides to the supposed alien humanoid body in Steven Greer's much-hyped movie Sirius, @cultofwedgeuk wrote:
Referring to a notorious purveyor of hoax UFO videos on YouTube, Puxley, @Holographic_Me, wrote:
  • I've seen better on thirdphase...#RoswellSlides  
  • #Roswellslides look like Mexican Taxidermy
@DanPHodges  also posted this photo, with the comment, "Some dickhead with a beret talking rubbish."
This is J.J. Hurtak, who has nothing whatsoever to do with the Roswell Slides, but spoke anyway.

@SpatzieLover:  "Last slide shown at event was the second slide."
Not everyone was dismissive of the program. Michael Salla of, notorious even among UFOlogists for his willingness to accept wild claims, wrote that "The photos may finally be smoking gun evidence that an interplanetary spaceship crashed in July 1947 near Roswell, New Mexico, and U.S. military officials have orchestrated a high level national security cover-up ever since." (Salla recently was among the very few UFOlogists who took seriously President Obama's joking comments that space aliens control the USA.) But the volume of negative, snarky comments on Twitter and elsewhere about the Roswell Slides greatly outnumbered the few from those who found it convincing. Considering the overall level of credulous belief among UFOlogists who nonetheless refuse to takes these slides seriously, and the fact that well-known UFOlogists and Roswell promoters like Kevin Randle and Stanton Friedman are among the naysayers, Jaime Maussan's UFO Slides extravaganza must be judged an #EPICFAIL. Friedman was quite correct when he stated, "I could find no convincing information that there is any connection between the slides and Roswell." Many sincere UFO proponents are bewailing the negative effect that this fiasco will have on the public's perception of "serious" UFO research, comparing it to the much-hyped 1988 TV program UFO Cover-up Live, now remembered chiefly for its "revelation" that the aliens love strawberry ice cream. If there is any silver lining to the whole fiasco, it is Maussan's admission that "I lost about $100 thousand in the event, even though we had six thousand people in the auditorium and a few thousand watching on the Internet." Hopefully that should discourage copy-cat Roswell exploiters.

Summarizing the event on Facebook, Shepherd Johnson wrote, "From what I've gathered on social media, Astronaut Mitchell was a no show, Hellyer took astronaut's place, Dolan was there but didn't speak, auditorium at 40% capacity, mostly CGI renderings of aliens, might have missed it but it looked like only one slide, glitches in the online streaming, people on twitter mostly mocking the event."


  1. For my money the most authoritative and profound comment on the Slides comes from UK ufologist (former policeman with a certain overbearing style) Gary Heseltine, speaking to the Daily Mirror


    "I know many of the people who were involved," he told Mirror Online.
    "They wouldn't risk their reputation by appearing at this event if the photos weren't genuine.

    "From my background as a policeman, I know what evidence is. These were compelling images of a being which was not human."

    So now you know, beyond all shadow of doubt. M'lud.

    —Peter B

    1. I thank Yer Grace fer this astonishing proof.

      Did yer see that Dr. David Clarke's new book "How UFOs Conquered the World" is dedicated to Yer Grace? An he even gives a "thanks" to me! I'm sure Count Otto would be glad to hear that.


    2. I did see that dedication, and was most touched. I was also pleased to hear that it appears in your copy too. I had briefly wondered if it was unique to the copy David C so kindly sent me. One simply cannot trust these MI5 types, after all. But I think he did a pretty fine job, and your reputation and mine as arch-debunkers and pillars of the global cover-up should remain firm for another year or so. Which is a great relief; it will also save many people from having to think, thus contributing to an overall lowering of global carbon emissions.

      —Peter B

    3. "UFO fans left heartbroken"

      I'm always fascinated by UFOlogy repeating the same story:

      There's going to be a big announcement soon! Smoking gun stuff! The big announcement either never comes or it's this kind of clown show.

      I'm reminded of Hoagland's evidence of alien structures on the moon blow out at the DC national press club. Oh. The excitement. You just don't rent out the national press club if you have, you know, just blurry moon photos. And it turned out to be a bunch of blurry photos.

  2. To clarify, there was a lull when people making comments on social media were saying that they thought the event was over and that Dolan hadn't even spoken. Dolan did speak but his talk was cut off on the feed that I was later observing and that various other people were monitoring. This was a free online feed so it is unclear if Dolan's talk was completely cut off (even for those who paid) or not.

    Shepherd Johnson

  3. Maussan lost 100K? How much went to the mastermind behind this whole farce? That mastermind was not Carey or Schmitt. They were just along for the ride. The real mastermind was Adam Dew. He created the story about the slides. I have no doubt that these images were made in the 1940s. However, there was no proof provided (other than anecdotal) that any of the other claims (high connections, the slides were concealed, Hilda was a pilot, etc.) were true. He had years to verify some of these claims and all we got was "somebody told me".

  4. You know, I was actually surprised by these pictures when I finally saw them properly. Given the extreme secrecy about what the slides actually looked like, they were obviously going to be unconvincing, in the same way that movies which don't have press screenings prior to release are always dreadful. But I thought they'd be at least a little bit ambiguous, leaving some tiny shred of doubt for True Believers to cling to.

    These are so obviously snapshots of a mummified child in a museum that there's simply no way that anyone involved can conceivably have spent three years trying to find out the truth about them without admitting that they don't show a dead extraterrestrial after all, unless they're stupid, insane, or Edgar Mitchell. Which removes all possibility of doubt that any of the people behind this circus were sincere. It's been all about telling lies to make money from the start.

    When even Nick Pope is "underwhelmed", you've pretty much hit rock bottom in terms of ufological credibility! The only way down from there is for the slides to be denounced as unconvincing by David Icke. People are inevitably comparing the hoax to the alien autopsy scam 20 years ago, but that was a real hoax - those guys made a proper movie with a special effects dummy and everything! What we have here are just somebody's old holiday snaps.

    As my school reports used to say: "Must try harder". The girls responsible for the Cottingley fairy photos went to the trouble of cutting out cardboard fairies to make their pictures look halfway plausible. If you can't do better than, or even as well as, two girls aged 16 and 9 who were just playing a practical joke that got out of hand, you have indeed epically failed!

  5. Well, that was interesting....can anyone direct me towards the next stop on the ufology traveling carnival show?

  6. Afterward, Dolan wrote a post on Facebook where he tried to both pander to the believers and minimise the damage to his cred.

    "...although I still do not yet have a firm position on the slides, I think they are interesting and worthy of continued investigation by qualified individuals. I do not think any of this is a hoax."

    The Coast to Coast image made it definite this was a child mummy, therefore, the event was a total scam. There is no wiggle room here. Yet Dolan characterised critics as "lazy" and "childish." His pretense of prudence is just shameful:

    "So, to those critics, I suggest that rather than rush to judgement, why not simply acquaint yourself with the arguments put forth that support them? Once you do that, once you understand the technical issues better, don’t you think you will be better able to critique them?"

    A few commenters to his post were stunned by Dolan's posturing, but the vast majority were full of praise for his feigned open-mindedness.

    Maussan has tweeted (Google Translate): "I realize that there are few humans really honest ... really honest .. I think that's why no one wants to accept another reality"

    1. One mad thing about Dolan's post is his satisfaction with the "provenance" of the Slides. Er, what provenance? What chain of evidence? What iron linkage? (And never mind a Roswell connexion, even.)

      All his solemn wittering about scientific investigation (how? on what?) slithers into the mire, courtesy of this banana skin. It's not a matter of science, it's a matter of detective work. These boys have supposedly had three years to do that; the shadowy RSRG has done more in about three weeks.

      Meanwhile, some of the comments 'against' the slides on that page have been pretty sharp. Someone even conjures Loki, Puck and Anansi. Perhaps of more interest, intrigue & perhaps informativeness to anthropologists, sociologists and PSHers are the endorsements by his fans.

      But it is Friday night, and soon time for chicken soup with barley. Not exactly a Sephardi dish, but one must make do with what one is served. Dew & Co have certainly doled out a stack of smoaking turds for our delectation here. As the years roll by it will be interesting to discover if Dew &c were hoaxed (and by whom), or were scammers, or... But don't mistake me, I still love it.

      —Peter B

  7. Pretense, feigned, posturing, are three of the words I've used to describe the acts of these slippery slimy showmen of woo for decades. Good words, Terry!

    You didn't expect Doland would be any different from the rest, did you? No!

    It's not as if Hoaxland admitted there was no "face" on Mars when the MOC made that perfectly clear in 1998. As if it wasn't perfectly clear to any rational intelligent adult from the get-go--just as this "Roswell slides" non-issue was.

    So no biggie, it was a prank, and it's business as usual. Rational intelligent adults know the world with certainty, it's extraordinary claims about it and the broken people who make them that are the subjects of Scientific skepticism.

    Now, what is it that Doland, Hoaxland and other slimy showmen of woo lack?

    In a better organized society they'd be institutionalized or shot, but we don't do that here. So what is their undiagnosed illness, their unindictable crime? Hmmm?

    1. Zoam: Narcissism; plus the narcissism of small differences. Also known as ego, self-importance, &c. But then your question was, I think, rhetorical. Especially as there are other people it would be more suitable to shoot. Having just suffered a General Election, I beg leave to say I know whereof I speak.

      —Peter B

  8. It's nice to see our resident venomous troll finally showing his true colors!

    "In a better organized society they'd be institutionalized or shot, but we don't do that here."

    Zoam, old buddy, what exactly you consider to be a "better organized society"? North Korea? Stalinist Russia? The Islamic State? How about Nazi Germany? A lot of people knock Hitler, but even his harshest critics have to admit that when it came to murdering everyone who disagreed with him, he was a very effective leader indeed. Or maybe, as your choice of pseudonym suggests, you're Jewish, so Hitler probably isn't your ideal poster-boy. How about Pol Pot? Or Idi Amin? Or Caligula?

    I think you'll find, "zoam", that suggesting people who disagree with you deserve to be murdered, or at least locked up, and that societies which do such things are in any way better than ones which don't, isn't going to make you too many friends around here. Try the David Icke forum - they seem to appreciate your kind of attitude there. Though you might want to change your username, because a lot of those guys don't like Jews very much.

    You talk about "their undiagnosed illness" zoam. So what's yours? Because people who think that anyone who holds contrary views to their own deserves to die is at best ill. Unless of course you're evil?

    On a much, much lighter note, Robert's quite right to assume I approve of the Duke of Mendoza having a book about aliens conquering the world dedicated to him. Way to go, Duke! If somebody did that very thing for me, I'd feel that I'd arrived. Though I might have great difficulty figuring out precisely where. I haven't been this jealous since BBC radio were looking for somebody to play a fictional character called Count Otto Black, and they turned me down on the grounds that actually being him was less important than being a proper actor. They ended up casting some talentless nobody called Andy Serkis.

    Anyway, good one, D of M! We spurious aristocrats are an endangered species, especially since Screaming Lord Sutch committed suicide in 1999. If you were following the election we in the UK had yesterday very closely indeed, you may have noticed that his rival successors Howling Laud Hope and Lord Toby Jug scored 72 and 50 votes respectively in direct competition with each other, while completely forgetting to be the slightest bit funny. This sort of thing doesn't help, but it's a lesson for us all, not unlike the Roswell Slides, only cheaper.

    1. Misunderstand rhetoric and go off on tangents much, "Otto?"
      It appears the Duke had no problem understanding the joke.

      I'd like to see even one example of venom or trolling by me.

      Doland, Hoaxland, Maussan and Greer and other showmen of WOO don't "disagree" with me, their idiosyncratic "UFO" fantasy-world narratives disagree with world Scientific reality.

      It's not as if there's any equivalence in our statements about the world. But then it's not as if I'm speaking to a sane person.

      I suppose I should have said the worthless charlatans should be banished, you know, old "Otto," like poets in The Republic. (Hint)

      "Next Loon!"

  9. Regarding the guy in the background: where the heck are his legs?

  10. And there we have it. Zoamchomsky confirms that he doesn't grasp in the slightest why suggesting that people whose worldview is not the same as his deserve to be killed is wrong. Zoam, I am never going to directly respond again to you because that would be feeding the troll, which is never a good idea.

    But just this once, I will say this. True skepticism is about truth. If the facts indicate that alien spaceships (or whatever) are not really visiting this planet, then the skeptical position is that of course they aren't. Though a true skeptic would of course reverse his or her position if facts came to light which genuinely indicated otherwise.

    For the record, I do not believe that the available evidence makes it even remotely likely that extraterrestrials have ever visited this planet, though I would love it if they had, because hey! - We Are Not Alone! Unfortunately, they almost certainly haven't. Them's the breaks.

    Whereas you, zoam, are simply looking for someone to disagree with as viciously as possible. Any suggestion at all that people you disagree with deserve to die is not a "joke", even if you claim after the fact that of course it was. I am an atheist who profoundly disagrees with the beliefs of everyone who worships at the church down the street. Yet, so long as they do no harm, I would defend their right to believe what they do, even if it makes no sense to me. And I would fight tooth and nail against any UK government that proposed sending Christians to concentration camps because believing in Jesus was stupid.

    You, on the other hand, have implicitly suggested that people who hold unusual beliefs deserve to be imprisoned or killed, and you've explicitly stated that I am insane because I don't agree with you.

    Zoam, I am not actually writing this comment to you, because I honestly think there is something wrong with you that makes rational discourse impossible. I am sorry that you have this problem which apparently causes you a great deal of mental anguish, but there's nothing I can do about it.

    I am writing this comment because I am proud to be a skeptic, and I think that a high-profile skeptical blog such as this one really doesn't need comments suggesting in any way that skeptics consider their opponents not just wrong and/or foolish, but subhuman and unworthy to carry on living. The default position of every genuine skeptic is: "My worldview is the most probable, but feel free to knock it down if you possibly can." It is not: "You have fewer human rights than I do because I say that you are wrong."

    Like I said before, I will never again directly address zoamchomsky because I do not believe there's any point. But I sincerely believe the skeptical movement needs to distance itself from maniacal bigots who advocate murder and then pretend they didn't really mean it.

    1. Aw, c'mon, Count. I have profoundly disagreed with Zoam's kind of denialist skepticism on this blog, and I entirely agree with what you to say about "genuine" skepticism. On the other hand I can recognize hyperbole and even humour when I see it. The man is not politically correct, it is true, but then neither am I, which is perhaps why I could see the joke. Being offensive is part of a human right, and there is no right not to be offended. What I also see in your latest post, allegedly not addressing Zoam, are PC blinkers of the worst totalitarian Twitterati kind, and a tendency to histrionics—all that claptrap about parking Christians in concentration camps, for instance, which so far no one has done. (So don't tempt me.) Just stick to the skepticism.

      And apologies to all and sundry for rocketing off topic.

      —Peter B

  11. Why is there no refraction associated with the thick glass it's resting on?

    There are a whole lot of problems with the above photo, esp. when it's compared to the second photograph. These things have been worked over -- badly. They're not even worth discussing.

    What a waste of time.

  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

  13. Mr. Robert Salas say:

    By Robert Salas
    The UFO Chronicles

    "Some of the participants claim that no money was made from this. However, if that is the case why were high prices charged for attendance and why was it streamed world-wide for $20 a pop. Certainly the organizers were entitled to recoup their expenses, but are they entitled if they promoted a sham? A recent news article from Mexico states that there were over 7,000 people in attendance at the event and another 2,500,000 paid the $20 to view the live stream! That is well over $50 million! If these figures are accurate, this is not an insignificant amount of money."

    So, Jaime Maussán didn't lose any money. He made a big amount of dollars out of it.

  14. Wow what a Great Information about World Day its very nice informative post. thanks for the post.


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.