From: Bruce Maccabee <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:46:36 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 09:05:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case >From: Erol Erkmen <firstname.lastname@example.org> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <email@example.com> >Subject: Ed Walters' Photos and Gulf Breeze Case >Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 01:51:00 +0300 >*On June 10, 1990, the Pensacola News Journal ran a story >announcing that a UFO model had been found in the attic of Ed >Walters' former residence. >One week later, the newspaper announced that a Gulf Breeze >teenager, later identified as Tommy Smith, had helped Walters >hoax the UFO photos. >On June 19, Charles Flannigan, MUFON State Director for Florida, >announced MUFON was reopening the Walters' case to investigate >these new allegations. He assigned then State Section Directors, >Rex and Carol Salisberry, to assist him in this investigation. >When the Salisberrys failed to deliver a complete report on the >allegations (as outlined by MUFON's Deputy Director of >Investigations, Dan Wright), the MUFON Chief Investigator for >Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Gary Watson, was assigned to >the task. Watson completed his investigation and submitted his >report on May 23, 1991; his report was 29 pages long with 27 >attachments. >The following paragraphs summarize the central facts brought out >in Watson's investigation. -Bruce Maccabee, Physicist, >photoanalyst and a MUFON state director accepted professsional >fees for his work on the photos from Ed Walters' publisher. > >(from Robert Collins ) >more info: >http://members.tripod.com/~ufolojist/ed.html This is all old recycled stuff. The responses to these arguments have been available for years. Old wine in a new (Turkish) bottle. No one ever proved that the Gulf Breeze sightings were a "giant fraud." Mr. Black's arguments have been responded to (and are being responded to). 1. Oechsler did "accept $5000" to cover the costs of a photo lab and materials and labor for making numerous copies of the original photos, said copies being both prints and slides. Each photo was copied at two or more exposure levels for research purposes. Each photo was cleaned carefully before being copied and special care was taken to eliminate glare or reflections when the originals were brightly illuminates ("light blasted" ) to show the details in the very low brightness areas. This copying operation took several weeks and produced well over a hundred slides and prints. It was an expensive operation. 2. I accepted a payment for writing the last chapter in the book, Gulf Breeze Sightings. 3. William Hyzer claims the "road shot:" is a hoax. However, his argument regarding the lack of a reflection in the hood of the truck has been refuted. The hood was bent in an accident. The bending changed the reflection. poperties. 4. The videotape Ed took on Dec. 28, 1987 has not yet been explained. 5. There is no doubt that he said he wasn't abducted on the Oprah show even though the the last chapter that he wrote in the book has in its title the claim that he was abducted. At the time Ed thought his story was already a subject of ridicule and he didn't want further ridicule that would occur if he discussed the information which indicated an abduction. (This ultimately was published in his 1994 book, Abductions In Gulf Breeze, Avon Pub. company) 6. The model in Ed's old house was found under circumstances which indicate that it was placed there by someone who wanted the model to be found. Certainly if Ed had placed it where it was found he wouldn't want anyone else to find it. In fact, if Ed had made it and wanted no one to fin it, why wouldn't he just destroy it? 7. Ed arranged for a single polygraph test with Harvey McLaughlin, who told me he had done thousands of such tests for companies that had hired him. When Ed passed the test McLaughlin didn't believe the result. Therefore when Ed returned for the results of the test McLaughlin said that there were a few things he wanted to check and he connected up the polygraph a second time. In between the tests he had checked up on Ed's UFO sightings and asked some different questions. Ed was not expecting a second test, so it was a complete surprise. Ed passed the second test as well.... no indications of deceit, so McLaughlin wrote in his report that , in his opinion, Ed was being truthful. McLaughlin told me that Ed was not a sociopath or "con man" type of person who would be likely to tel lies. Dr. Dan Overlade, clinical psychologist who gave Ed a collection of personality and psychological tests, told me the same thing. Neither of these men foun evidence that Ed had lied. 8. Tommy Smith's claim of having seen Ed fake photographs was shown to be completely at odds with th evidence. Smith said that Ed told him how he faked some of the pictures. Smith's descriptions of these faking techniques were temselves fakes. Smith's description of how a model was photographed has been found to be incorrect. The "Smith Method" of mounting a model on a pipe and shining a flashlight up through it to light the inside has been tested in numerous ways and found to fail. It just would not create UFO images such as are in Ed's photos. According to Mr. Smith, a circular area of dead grass found in the high school athletic field behind Ed's (old) house was created by Ed in te following way: Ed turned a trampoline upside down and jumped up and down on it. This is, of course, ridiculous. One would have to leave said trampoline on the grass for days to kill it. During that time someone at the school certainly would have noticed it. Furthermore, the grass stayed dead for months and it took years for the grass to return to normal. (A test was made by a government scientist to determine whether or not there were chemicals in the ground tat could have killed the grass. None were found.) 9. It is true that Believer Bill and Jane have never been "turned themselves in." There were also a few less distinct photos. However, there were many witnesses in the area (117 sightings, 93 not involving Ed, between Nov. 11, 1987, and July 10, 1988.) It is amusing to note that in this web page presentation one of the UFO photos is #11 showing the blue beam. This photo could not have been taken by the double exposure method claimed by Hyzer and others. The reason why it couldn't is explained in UFOs Are Real, Here'S The Proof (by Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee, Avon, 1997).
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp