Reactions to the "Alien Autopsy" Footage

by Mac Tonnies

(To explore this issue from a variety of viewpoints, as well as order CDs containing the complete, unedited "autopsy," click here.)

The "alien autopsy" (AA) and its associated "debris footage" have intrigued me since the material emerged in 1995. While I consider the possibility of an outright hoax extremely likely, the footage is interesting when examined closely. The following commentary is an exercise in speculation and shouldn't be construed as an endorsement of the AA. However, until the AA can be demonstrated to be a hoax, the possibility that it is a record of an actual event cannot be excluded.

1.) The "Autopsy"

Most immediately interesting to me is the anatomy of the eponymous "alien." If the AA is "real," then it's highly unlikely that the cadaver is alien in the common usage of the term (i.e. extraterrestrial in origin). In fact, the "alien" is essentially human. Anatomical discrepancies are few and superficial, including a somewhat disproportionately large head and orbital sockets and six-digited hands and feet (polydactylism). There's no compelling reason to think the AA deals with an entity independently evolved from homo sapiens.

The androgynous "alien" seen prior to dissection.

Nevertheless, the alleged cadaver is anomalous in several respects. For example, it has no observable navel. The presence of nipples is debatable, and if the cadaver is female (as evidenced by the apparent vaginal opening), then it doesn't have any secondary sexual characteristics. The cadaver's legs are curiously bowed--a trait commented on, oddly enough, in the controversial MJ-12 Special Operations Manual. Whether this is coincidence or evidence of a common origin for the manual and the AA (real or hoax) is unknown.

"DANGER: MAXIMUM WORKING TIME 1 HOURS"

The CDs provided to me by Ed Gehrmen show anonymous "pathologists" dissecting the entity with unexpected haste. A warning sign at the far edge of the small operating room suggests a possible biohazard, and the pathologists are appropriately decked out in cumbersome isolation suits.

The "alien" sans eye coverings.

Interestingly, the pathologists seem to know what they're doing--to the degree that it appears they've already dissected a similar cadaver or have been briefed by others who have. The lead pathologist quickly peels away the entity's opaque eye coverings as if experienced with their removal.

The cadaver's "guts" are hard to discern in the footage's somewhat grainy black and white. Of special interest is the removal of a small, transparent (?) object from the chest area; medical commentators have suggested this is an artificial heart valve. If so, then this is most unexpected and interesting, as the being has no apparent chest scar that would indicate previous surgery.

The uniquely emplaced "heart valve" and the lack of a navel suggest that the "alien," if authentic, might have been biologically "manufactured" rather than "born."

If the AA is a hoax, then I'm surprised that the hoaxers didn't use a more stereotypical (and therefore more "believable" and commercially viable) alien of the sort seen in books and documentaries about alien abduction (i.e. the standard large-eyed, spindly-bodied "gray").

The creature in the AA is thought-provoking because it is absurd, flying in the face of exobiological theory, exemplified by George Gaylord Simpson's paper "The Nonprevalence of Humanoids."

If the "alien" featured in the AA is real, then it is most certainly human, at least in a genetic sense. It may represent a feat of biotechnology of behalf of an unknown agency, extraterrestrial or otherwise.

2.) The "Debris"

Relatively little can be said with confidence about the "debris footage," with the exception that the six-fingered "control panels" seem to provide a direct link with the polydactyl being in the autopsy sequence.

The "control panels."

In the debris footage, a faceless man displays various metallic-looking artifacts, including large I-beams and the aforementioned control panels, one of which is jaggedly broken, revealing what might be layered circuitboard (or its alien equivalent).

A fanciful rendering of a six-fingered alien hand.

One of the I-beams (considerably heftier than the one described by Jesse Marcel, Jr., who handled material from the so-called "Roswell crash") is imprinted with mostly straight-edged symbols that somewhat resemble Cyrillic letterforms. The control panels are more intriguing, and suggest a certain level of premeditation and ambition on the part of the hypothetical hoaxers. Assuming the panels are functional and not decorative, it appears that they are designed to function using biofeedback principles. If real, then they are a much more aesthetically pleasing version of the various "dataglove" tactile computer interfaces used by engineers and pilots.

3.) The "Cameraman's" Story

I am inclined to accept none of the presumed "cameraman's" story as told by Ray Santilli, chief promoter of the AA footage. The cameraman's supposed "testimony," like the inferior (and undoubtedly hoaxed) "tent footage," has all the earmarks of an ad hoc fabrication intended to sell AA videotapes.

While I am certainly skeptical of the AA's authenticity and provenance, I think the enigma of the alleged "alien" and "debris" stands on its own merits. I'm most interested in unraveling the origin of the AA, regardless if it's a fake or, indeed, the proof UFO crash-retrieval researchers have been looking for all along.

[ Start | Mac | Book Reviews | Esoterica | Transhumanism | Literature | Cultural Phenomena | Dead Letter Office ]