UFO Evidence Forums : General Discussion
Return to the General Discussion Homepage
User not logged in - Login or Register

subject: Ray Santilli

  Replies 51 - 56 (out of 56 total)

Scott Elliot
8/2/2007 6:05:45 AM

LOL- Thanks Phillip. What do you think? This story is questionable all around. First of all Santilli is being charged, "Mister M" says he did the film and never was paid but why didnt Mister M come forward all these years?

My opinion is that this is a real video because Roswell was real and the government debunkers are trying to cover it up anyway they can.

Philip Edwards
8/3/2007 1:27:25 AM

Scott Elliot.

I have run out of information to be able to form any conclusive ideas as to the truth about the alien autopsy film, new evidence is needed. All I can say is that the alien I saw looked an awful lot like the one in the autopsy film and it had a 1 inch thick skull, a gizzard instead of intestines and a higher muscle fibre density giving the alien 5 times the body strength of a similar sized human, (the alien told me these facts).

Another main point I would like to make is that people moan about the Santilli autopsy film because they say he did it all for money, well there have been several other autopsy films which could also have been faked and done for money but no one cares at all about those. In other words the amount of interest the Santilli autopsy film generates could be interpreted as a cover up program!

8/3/2007 5:47:49 PM


Are we really supposed to just stop debating things because you say so?
Sounds like dictatorship, or worse yet, classical debunking style.


8/3/2007 7:38:42 PM


Haven't talked to you in a while.. glad to read you're still around..

If I may chirp in, I myself would prefer that the same interest and energies that seek to keep people like Santilli and this autopsy in the limelight, equally devote their efforts
past cases that are just as provocative, if not more so, than this one. Those cases, although they're dated, simply haven't resulted in the same level of doubts being raised -- yet they continue to be neglected, in my opinion. Where's the debate and effort to keep those in the limelight?

I'm only speaking for myself now, mind you, but incidents like Bentwaters, Socorro,
Lawrence Coyne, the sts48 footage and a host of other cases simply aren't given the same degree of attention within the 'believer' community - at least, that's my impression.

Although we have discussed many of these cases, the opposing arguments simply
haven't managed to tarnished them to the same degree as they have with Walton, Meier or Santilli. I guess what I'm suggesting is that when you have that many doubts, it's time
to focus to other cases.

I am hardly a debunker, but I do think that sufficient and reasonable discussion/doubts
have long been made over cases like Santilli, Meier, Walton and a few others. I'm thinking that there's some preference to keep these in the front row for one reason or

I'm not advocating that debate become selective... and I don't think LV's response was
intended to suggest such a thing..

Certainly, I hope to be respectful to those who maintain their interest in
Santilli, Walton and Meier.. I would however, like to see some equal expression or interest in other cases that continue to defy reasonable explanation.


8/7/2007 11:01:20 PM


Well said. Again, I don't have any objections to good debate or those who are fascinated with Meier, Santilli or Walton.

My reasoning is that people like Santilli, Walton and Meier have been examined quite extensively over the years, with sufficient doubts being raised -- yet, they keep getting re-energized with new flavors of mystery which seems to keep them in the limelight. I simply am not able to grasp why these type cases seem to take precedence over so many worthy ones.

It seems amazing that when you look at examples like the Lawrence Coyne encounter, the Socorro incident, the Trent images (and others), which have yet to be satisfactority explained (or where sufficient doubts have been raised), they simply do not receive the same degree of interest. I realize they are somewhat dated, but the implications are just as monumental.

And as you've pointed out, as objective as you and I might try to be, to disagree in many situations often generates a 'debunker' label as a response. And that's
frustrating because I would like to think we're all on the same 'team', wanting to
elevate (and keep the spotlight on) those reports that have not raised
sufficient doubts or have withstood debate from the skeptics.

We can freely discuss Meier, Santilli and Walton as much as readers would
like to.. I don't object to that... but I would certainly welcome the same energetic,
knit picky level of interest toward some of the other cases that actually deserve to
stay in the limelight.


Philip Edwards
3/7/2008 6:29:14 AM

The end has finally come for the autopsy film, there was no original film, well I have no proof to dispute that. All that I can say is, perhaps it was just a coincidence that the alien I saw looked so similar except for the fact that the one I saw had breasts.


  Replies 51 - 56 (out of 56 total)

Return to General Discussion Homepage



Ads help to support this site: