Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Jun -> Re: 'Roswell-- Anatomy of A Myth'

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 06:44:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 13:15:11 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Roswell-- Anatomy of A Myth'

>From: DONFEII@aol.com [Don Ecker]
>Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:40:17 -0400 (EDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'Roswell-- Anatomy of A Myth'

>Kent Jeffrey appeared on my radio show, UFOs Tonite! during the hoop-la over
>the Alien Autopsy. While I have always maintained that the "Autopsy" was very
>suspect, Jeffrey said something that always bothered me. I have the entire
>show on cassette, but without transcribing it, do not have his exact words.
>To paraphrase, he said;

>"This (the autopsy) can't be real, the creature is too humanoid. An alien
>would not be humanoid"  The exact wording can be heard on the show. But my
>question was, why not? After all, all the reports from Roswell (people who
>claimed to have seen the occupants) reported humanoids. How can we say what
>an occupant would look like? Over the last 50 years, most reports from around
>the world have described UFO occupants as humanoid. I found his assertion
>strange to say the least. After all, at the time he was pushing his Roswell
>Declaration very hard.

>Don Ecker
>UFO Magazine
>www.ufomagazine.com

While I can respect Jeffrey's decision to reverse himself with regard to
the Roswell crash, I felt that his reaction to the Alien Autopsy "film" was
far too intense.  There were (are are) many who believe the "film" is a
fraud, but Jeffrey took a proactive role in trying to prove that it HAD to
be a fake.  It would appear that he carried a number of pre-conceived
notions around that weren't disclosed in public.  I will admit that the
timing of this reversal seems somewhat suspicious, but since his article on
Roswell is (IMHO) written no better than his "Alien Autopsy" piece, I
suspect it will fade to obscurity soon enough.