Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Newfrance

Travis Walton.

164 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Newfrance

Here is a brief review of the 1975, SnowFlake, Arizona, UFo Abduction of Travis Walton.......check it out...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy

Yeah, they even made a movie out of it.

Decent movie, didn't believe a damn word of it though.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
5 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

Yeah, they even made a movie out of it.

Decent movie, didn't believe a damn word of it though.

Even Walton admits the movie was pretty much Hollywood fiction when it came to the supposed abduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John n b

The Travis Walton case is probably one of the most genuine case of abduction along with Betty and Barney  hill and Alan Godfrey in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew

The part where the syrup drips on his face is my favorite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

If they all passed the lie detector test, you'd really have to wonder on this one.   I'm 80% convinced. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leo Krupe
2 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

If they all passed the lie detector test, you'd really have to wonder on this one.   I'm 80% convinced. 

No need to wonder, at least as far as lie detector tests are concerned. There's a reason they're inadmissible evidence in court (at the very least, in U.S. courts).

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/apr/22/lie-detector-fallibility-criminal-psychology

Quote

The "lie detection" part comes from an interpretation of the differences in arousal between these types of answers.... Because there is no pattern of arousal that is unique to deception, the decision to classify a set of responses as untruthful is inevitably a leap from the shaky ground of ambiguous data into the fog of inference.

https://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph.aspx

Quote

So-called "lie detection" involves inferring deception through analysis of physiological responses to a structured, but unstandardized, series of questions.... There is no evidence that any pattern of physiological reactions is unique to deception. An honest person may be nervous when answering truthfully and a dishonest person may be non-anxious. Also, there are few good studies that validate the ability of polygraph procedures to detect deception.

Given the demonstrable unreliability of lie detectors, why are you "80%" convinced, Earl?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

@Leo Krupe  That does not prove they were all skilled at how to beat a lie detector, and lied.  Pretty hard to believe ALL of them could get away with it.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leo Krupe
13 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

@Leo Krupe  That does not prove they were all skilled at how to beat a lie detector, and lied.  Pretty hard to believe ALL of them could get away with it.

 

It's not hard at all, considering the examiner's are interpreting the results. A combination of deliberate deception on the witness's part, coupled with interpretation (pro or con) on the examiner's part, easily equals passing the test. Even if the witness isn't *deliberately* being deceptive, he could fool the examiner--especially if he's not being deliberate, I should say. In other words, if I believe I'm telling the truth, I may pass the test, even if what I'm saying isn't true.

However, read the articles I posted. One reason for failing the test, even when being truthful, is because of nervousness. Another is there are no standardized questions. And those were recent articles. The Walton "abduction" took place over 40 years ago, in 1975. So we know much more about polygraphs now than we did then.

No, there has to be more compelling evidence than simple polygraphs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
6 minutes ago, Leo Krupe said:

It's not hard at all, considering the examiner's are interpreting the results. A combination of deliberate deception on the witness's part, coupled with interpretation (pro or con) on the examiner's part, easily equals passing the test. Even if the witness isn't *deliberately* being deceptive, he could fool the examiner--especially if he's not being deliberate, I should say. In other words, if I believe I'm telling the truth, I may pass the test, even if what I'm saying isn't true.

Now stop and think about that, Leo. How in tarnation could several people THINK they were telling the truth about a UFO abduction when they were not? What could they possibly be mixing  the UFO up with?? I can't see it, sorry.

6 minutes ago, Leo Krupe said:

However, read the articles I posted. One reason for failing the test, even when being truthful, is because of nervousness. Another is there are no standardized questions. And those were recent articles. The Walton "abduction" took place over 40 years ago, in 1975. So we know much more about polygraphs now than we did then.

No, there has to be more compelling evidence than simple polygraphs.

And therein lies a problem, Leo.  Did common folk back then know how to pass a lie detector test?  Would they dare to try it knowing that if they fail, they get charged with filing a false claim? Over what, a prank? And I bet they've never done this before, too. Who would back in 1975?, That's risky business, IMO

All in all, I see the chances as being slim that they all practiced passing a lie detector test when they were lying and got away with it!

That's why I'm at 80%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

On the Gulf coast in the early 70's we had a couple of fisherman over in Pascagoula, MS. that reported being taken aboard a craft and physically examined.  They were just a couple of working men who were out fishing when the event happened.  No one ever shook them from their story.  At a minimum, THEY believed what they were saying.  I was only 12 at the time but I recall how brutal the locals were with poking fun at them.  Who'd put themselves through that for fun?

Edited by and then
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leo Krupe
2 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Now stop and think about that, Leo. How in tarnation could several people THINK they were telling the truth about a UFO abduction when they were not? What could they possibly be mixing  the UFO up with?? I can't see it, sorry.

And therein lies a problem, Leo.  Did common folk back then know how to pass a lie detector test?  Would they dare to try it knowing that if they fail, they get charged with filing a false claim? Over what, a prank? And I bet they've never done this before, too. Who would back in 1975?, That's risky business, IMO

All in all, I see the chances as being slim that they all practiced passing a lie detector test when they were lying and got away with it!

That's why I'm at 80%

You're right Earl, there's no possible way those primitive people in the mid-1970s could've had the sophistication to know how to fool a lie detector. Why, they was jus' hones' folk! Why would they lie 'bout sumthin' like 'at?!

Would they dare to try it? Of course they would. Why? I've no doubt money had something to do with it. And why can't it be "just a prank"? People play pranks all the time. I don't know Walton's motivation, but there are many more simple explanations before I'd get to "authentic abduction by ET".

Try this on for size:

https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/09/25/nsa-whistleblower-reveals-how-to-beat-a-polygraph-test

Quote

First, Tice says, a person can trick the tester on "probable-lie" questions. During a polygraph's pre-test interview, the tester usually asks a person to answer questions they are likely to lie about. These include questions like: 'Have you ever stolen money?,' 'Have you ever lied to your parents?,' or 'Have you ever cheated on a test?'. Most people have done these at least once, but lie about it. So the tester uses a person's response to a likely lie as a way to establish how a person physically reacts while lying.

Tice says to trick the tester, a person should lie in response to these questions like most other people would, but also bite their tongue hard while doing so, which will set off other physiological reactions in the body. The tester's "needles will fly everywhere," says Tice, "and he will think, 'This guy is a nervous nelly. He has a strong physical reaction when he's lying.'"

Polygraphs are easy to beat. 

[Bolding mine] I'm sure no one in the olden days of the mid-1970s could possibly have imagined to bite their tongue in order to beat a polygraph.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leo Krupe
53 minutes ago, and then said:

On the Gulf coast in the early 70's we had a couple of fisherman over in Pascagoula, MS. that reported being taken aboard a craft and physically examined.  They were just a couple of working men who were out fishing when the event happened.  No one ever shook them from their story.  At a minimum, THEY believed what they were saying.  I was only 12 at the time but I recall how brutal the locals were with poking fun at them.  Who'd put themselves through that for fun?

I remember that case well. It happened October 11, 1973. I was a believer in aliens then, and was fascinated.

It might not've been for fun. They might actually have believed it happened. But that doesn't mean it did. They were never able to offer any corroborating evidence of their claims. Personally, I don't believe it happened as claimed, but that doesn't mean I think they're lying, because I have no idea what their motivation actually was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
56 minutes ago, Leo Krupe said:

I don't believe it happened as claimed, but that doesn't mean I think they're lying, because I have no idea what their motivation actually was.

it probably started off as a laugh, ya know, got too drunk, late back & when questioned replied with something like: 'yeah i was abducted by aliens hehe'== word gets out & before you know it you've got the local paper on your doorstep.

from there they just kept it up due to more & more media coverage - never in a million years would he have believed at the time that in years to come there would be a Hollywood film created from a stupid joke .... imo this is probably close to the truth...

Edited by Dejarma
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
1 hour ago, Leo Krupe said:

You're right Earl, there's no possible way those primitive people in the mid-1970s could've had the sophistication to know how to fool a lie detector. Why, they was jus' hones' folk! Why would they lie 'bout sumthin' like 'at?!

I didn't say it was impossible at all, Leo.

1 hour ago, Leo Krupe said:

Would they dare to try it? Of course they would. Why? I've no doubt money had something to do with it. And why can't it be "just a prank"? People play pranks all the time. I don't know Walton's motivation, but there are many more simple explanations before I'd get to "authentic abduction by ET".

Money had something to do with it...?  It's a  possibility.  I'd like to know if they ever did make money at this. You can say the same thing about anybody that has anything prolific to say, too. So, not buying the "money" theory all the way.

1 hour ago, Leo Krupe said:

Try this on for size:

https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/09/25/nsa-whistleblower-reveals-how-to-beat-a-polygraph-test

[Bolding mine] I'm sure no one in the olden days of the mid-1970s could possibly have imagined to bite their tongue in order to beat a polygraph.

Leo, of course there are ways. Now, wouldn't one or two of these guys get nervous taking this test and blow the whole thing up?  Very risky business. Their story is convincing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
freetoroam
8 hours ago, John n b said:

The Travis Walton case is probably one of the most genuine case of abduction along with Betty and Barney  hill and Alan Godfrey in the UK.

Lol. Genuine? 

I wish people would read the whole story and not just what they want to hear

Quote

The National Enquirer tabloid newspaper, which had a long-standing $100,000 prize offered for proof that UFOs were extraterrestrial. The Enquirer advised the Waltons that if they could pass a lie detector test, they might qualify for a large payment. Travis and Duane were not very keen on this idea, so the Enquirer agreed to keep the results secret should they not pass. The Waltons agreed. The Enquirer engaged an examiner named McCarthy, who, unfortunately, described Travis and Duane's results as "the plainest case of lying he had seen in 20 years." 

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4094

Even in 1975 the skies were being watched, and yet people still believe an alien craft could travel through the Universe, arrive without being spotted and this alleged advanced alien race abduct some 22 year old logger who meant nothing of importance to the planet Earth. 

 

Edited by freetoroam
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

No offense freetoroam, I wouldn't trust the sensationalist National Enquirer as far as I could throw the NAtional Enquirer.  Just a little insight here:

Walton Testimony  

Walton: "I normally would not have ever agreed to be on such a show. After my fellow crewmen and I passed polygraph tests from the Arizona state police polygraph examiner I wrote in my book that I was done addressing that aspect of it."

Very hard to get all of those guys to not get nervous and blow the test. But I admit, possible.

and: "We came back home and my wife had me retested with the most rigorous new tests we could find — in New Mexico where it is stringently regulated by the state because results are admissible in court there. A firm highly recommended by other examiners, one that does work for the Albuquerque Police Dept, the NM State Prison, and the U.S. Marshal’s office. The most accepted methods on state-of-the-art computerized equipment. I passed two different new tests flawlessly"

In that link, the author claims that he debunked WAlton after all. So it's a chowder fest. take your liking.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leo Krupe
2 hours ago, Dejarma said:

it probably started off as a laugh, ya know, got too drunk, late back & when questioned replied with something like: 'yeah i was abducted by aliens hehe'== word gets out & before you know it you've got the local paper on your doorstep.

from there they just kept it up due to more & more media coverage - never in a million years would he have believed at the time that in years to come there would be a Hollywood film created from a stupid joke .... imo this is probably close to the truth...

Agreed, it probably started as something like that. Nickell suggests hypnogogic sleep. I'm just being overly technical by saying we have no definitive idea of the motivation, because, you know, how can another person ever really *know* what motivates someone? Because mind reading is stage magic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leo Krupe
1 hour ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Money had something to do with it...?  It's a  possibility.  I'd like to know if they ever did make money at this. You can say the same thing about anybody that has anything prolific to say, too. So, not buying the "money" theory all the way.

"All the way..."? Okay, I'll buy that. But Travis made money on it. Naturally, don't ask me how much, but he's lectured on the convention circuit, "wrote" a book, sold the movie rights....was that his main motivation? See my other post about Hickson and Parker. (I've looked online, but can't find it--I remember one of them--I think it was Hickson, who was on the TV show "To Tell the Truth". This would've been probably no later than 1975, since it would've been fresh. Can anyone confirm that?)

 

1 hour ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Leo, of course there are ways. Now, wouldn't one or two of these guys get nervous taking this test and blow the whole thing up?  Very risky business. Their story is convincing.

I can't say which, if any, would've gotten nervous. There are lots of possibilities, ranging from being just a little bit high (it was the mid-70s) to not caring if they got caught to honestly believing what the story, to, and this is the least likely of all, they were telling the truth about an alien abduction.

You want to give them the full due because you believe that ET exists and has visited Earth, and has abducted people, regardless of evidence. You're convinced--I get that. I know that no one is going to get you to think otherwise (you've said that in other threads).

I just see that given the way people are--they lie, they delude themselves, they like to play practical jokes, they exaggerate half-truths, they're mistaken about events, they have a deeply ingrained will to believe, and all the other mental and emotional things going on, both positive and negative--a prosaic explanation, whatever it might be, is far, far more likely than an actual abduction by beings from another planet.

The alien abduction bar is (or should be) set very, very high. The Walton case doesn't clear that bar.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John n b
1 hour ago, freetoroam said:

Lol. Genuine? 

I wish people would read the whole story and not just what they want to hear

Even in 1975 the skies were being watched, and yet people still believe an alien craft could travel through the Universe, arrive without being spotted and this alleged advanced alien race abduct some 22 year old logger who meant nothing of importance to the planet Earth. 

 

Why would an abductee have to be of importance to the earth and who would you consider important to the earth.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
freetoroam
10 hours ago, John n b said:

Why would an abductee have to be of importance to the earth and who would you consider important to the earth.

If they are watching us or even are prepared to travel all those millions of mile to a distant planet, you would think they may spend a bit more time here to research us. 

Coming from out of space their view would see the areas of lights, cities and towns, surely that would be of interest, and if they have any intelligence, which they would have being able to reach us, they would know the lighted towns with lights is where there is definate life.

They seem to turn up in some remote spots and just pick up some redneck who probably did not even know the name of the president. 

I am just trying to imagine if we ever found a planet with life on, as we approached and saw the lights of a city, as an intelligent race, would we bypass that wonder and go and abduct some no body in a field,  or would we want to make contact with the leaders of people or people with knowledge like their NASA equivilent, who may be able to communicate with us on an equal level? 

 

Edited by freetoroam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LightAngel
1 hour ago, freetoroam said:

If they are watching us or even are prepared to travel all those millions of mile to a distant planet, you would think they may spend a bit more time here to research us. 

Coming from out of space their view would see the areas of lights, cities and towns, surely that would be of interest, and if they have any intelligence, which they would have being able to reach us, they would know the lighted towns with lights is where there is definate life.

They seem to turn up in some remote spots and just pick up some redneck who probably did not even know the name of the president. 

I am just trying to imagine if we ever found a planet with life on, as we approached and saw the lights of a city, as an intelligent race, would we bypass that wonder and go and abduct some no body in a field,  or would we want to make contact with the leaders of people or people with knowledge like their NASA equivilent, who may be able to communicate with us on an equal level? 

 

 

You make the mistake of thinking they would think like you do. -They wouldn't!

Maybe he is a nobody to you, but another life form might find him very interesting, and perhaps even tasty. :D

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John n b
1 hour ago, freetoroam said:

If they are watching us or even are prepared to travel all those millions of mile to a distant planet, you would think they may spend a bit more time here to research us. 

Coming from out of space their view would see the areas of lights, cities and towns, surely that would be of interest, and if they have any intelligence, which they would have being able to reach us, they would know the lighted towns with lights is where there is definate life.

They seem to turn up in some remote spots and just pick up some redneck who probably did not even know the name of the president. 

I am just trying to imagine if we ever found a planet with life on, as we approached and saw the lights of a city, as an intelligent race, would we bypass that wonder and go and abduct some no body in a field,  or would we want to make contact with the leaders of people or people with knowledge like their NASA equivilent, who may be able to communicate with us on an equal level? 

 

One day when our technology allows us to take scientists into deep space our spacecraft will be a UFO on some distant planet, isn't that what all these unmanned probes are working towards, building up our knowledge with each mission, our first steps were the moon probably mars next. After all we've only been doing it for sixty years, just think what we will be doing in six hundred years and there must be other inhabited planets out there  that are hundreds if not thousands of years ahead of us in space technology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
freetoroam
27 minutes ago, LightAngel said:

 

You make the mistake of thinking they would think like you do. -They wouldn't!

Maybe he is a nobody to you, but another life form might find him very interesting, and perhaps even tasty. :D

I do not think they would think like us, i think they would be far more advanced than us. 

I think it is naive to think something which has the capability of travelling the Universe would not investigate us further. 

As humans we are trying to find ways to get to further planets, at the stage we are at, humans can not do that. An alien race could be anything, but to build spacecrafts and have the know how on how to travel the Universe, is way beyond us. 

They get here to pick up some guy in the middle of no where and yet ignore what is visible from space - lights. 

There is as much chance of an alien abducting an elephant or camel or even gathering up some of our plant life, but no spacecraft has been seen doing that, but these alleged crafts are suppose to be seen by these abductees, even though our skies are being watched by thousands and no one else saw it approaching Earth. 

The whole abducted thing is so ridiculous, created by people who have no idea about space or our atmoshpere.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
freetoroam
11 minutes ago, John n b said:

One day when our technology allows us to take scientists into deep space our spacecraft will be a UFO on some distant planet, isn't that what all these unmanned probes are working towards, building up our knowledge with each mission, our first steps were the moon probably mars next. After all we've only been doing it for sixty years, just think what we will be doing in six hundred years and there must be other inhabited planets out there  that are hundreds if not thousands of years ahead of us in space technology.

I hope if we ever reach another planet with life on it, we examine the planet from afar first and do not go in and abduct anything, to then return it and fly off. 

Unmanned probes can already send back details of planets,  do you think if it send back images of an area of lights, that we would ignore that and six hundred years later when man is on that craft, he heads for the remote part and not back to the ighted area?

Do you not think man would try to make contact....maybe signals, with the life on that planet? The likes of Travis would not be the one picking up those signals. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.