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 -
Sign in to follow this  
the13bats

Your opinions on the Cash Landrum case

75 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Vaz
On 10/17/2019 at 5:18 PM, stereologist said:

https://www.blueblurrylines.com/2012/07/cash-landrum-video-documentary.html

This site has some interesting things to point out about some of the mockumentaries Vaz thinks are non-fiction.

It should also be noted that as the13bats has discovered, the doctor never had access to the hospital records. I'm a bit surprised that the personal physician was not able to access the records of his patient. I suppose that was by choice. The records at the hospital would have prevented the good doctor from making up the ludicrous story he tried to sell to the world.

For those are impaired by being closed minded and have not inspected the presented material, the author Schuessler claimed access to the records while the doctor claimed he did not. Schuessler refused to reveal the records due to privacy concerns. MUFON got the records, but the personal physician did not. Odd right?

There is nothing factual against the sighting.  Just skeptic opinion.  No one has provided any believable details just lots of unqualified speculation.

The case still stands on the accounts of the witnesses and the doctors reports.  There are many reports by different doctors in the pdf file I linked.

Does anyone have anything credible against the sighting yet?

Edited by Vaz
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
the13bats
On 10/17/2019 at 6:39 PM, carddown said:

The big problem with the Cash-Landrum case is that most people know of it through 2nd-hand sources like Wikipedia and TV dramatizations that are full of bias and inaccuracies. This link is to my site loaded with original case documents. 
The Cash-Landrum UFO Case Document Collection
 

Here vaz, go do some real research

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vaz
36 minutes ago, the13bats said:

Here vaz, go do some real research

Show me one believable thing that discredits the case that is not opinion based please.

Edited by Vaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saru

Enough with the derogatory personal remarks please folks.

If your argument consists of calling someone else a 'troll' then you need to step back from the thread and re-evaluate your position.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
4 hours ago, Vaz said:

There is nothing factual against the sighting.  Just skeptic opinion.  No one has provided any believable details just lots of unqualified speculation.

The case still stands on the accounts of the witnesses and the doctors reports.  There are many reports by different doctors in the pdf file I linked.

Does anyone have anything credible against the sighting yet?

If the case stands solely on stories then it is nothing more than a story. And stories are pretty worthess especially stories such as those told by Cash and Landrum that change over time.

But the case also stands on the evidence which is that there is no evidence other than alopecia.

Does anything support this fairy tale? No.

Even the doc's story telling is not supported because the doc never got the hospital records.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
3 hours ago, Vaz said:

Show me one believable thing that discredits the case that is not opinion based please.

There is no need to discredit a story which has no evidence supporting it.

Evidence is not needed to support anything without evidence.

The goal is for Cash and Landrum to support their fairy tale and they never have.

On the other hand we learn that no one had radiation poisoning. One and only one person went to the hospital and biopsies showed it was alopecia.

Some of the things that appear to be completely false:  radiation, radiation poisoning, burns in the road, air force helicopters

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
4 hours ago, Vaz said:

Show me one believable thing that discredits the case that is not opinion based please.

One of the odd ideas I find is that people think that their ridiculous story needs to be discredited.

No. It is the goal of anyone backing a silly story like the Cash-Landrum fairy tale to provide evidence to support it. So far there has been nothing but story telling by the two women and that is nothing more than a fairy tale.

What makes this fairy tale suspicious:

  1. They claimed to know the exact spot they stopped and later could not
  2. They claimed radiation poisoning but claimed a lethal amount
  3. They produced a fake photo later on of sunburn circles
  4. They claimed seeing air force on helicopters not used by the air force
  5. They claimed the light was vague and later on it was diamond shaped

That's not a complete list of course.

Dumb stories end up with these laughable mistakes.

But as I stated there is no need to discredit a story. The supporters need to provide evidence to support the story and so far not a drop of evidence has been supplied. Pointing out places where the two women changed their stories over time is not evidence. It is a way of showing that the story is made up malarkey.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vaz
On 10/19/2019 at 1:13 PM, stereologist said:

One of the odd ideas I find is that people think that their ridiculous story needs to be discredited.

No. It is the goal of anyone backing a silly story like the Cash-Landrum fairy tale to provide evidence to support it. So far there has been nothing but story telling by the two women and that is nothing more than a fairy tale.

What makes this fairy tale suspicious:

  1. They claimed to know the exact spot they stopped and later could not
  2. They claimed radiation poisoning but claimed a lethal amount
  3. They produced a fake photo later on of sunburn circles
  4. They claimed seeing air force on helicopters not used by the air force
  5. They claimed the light was vague and later on it was diamond shaped

That's not a complete list of course.

Dumb stories end up with these laughable mistakes.

But as I stated there is no need to discredit a story. The supporters need to provide evidence to support the story and so far not a drop of evidence has been supplied. Pointing out places where the two women changed their stories over time is not evidence. It is a way of showing that the story is made up malarkey.

Nothing troublesome to the case here.

They claimed to know the exact spot they stopped and later could not

The road had apparently been repaired.  It was nightime.  They were disorientated by an extra-ordinary event.  They were just ordinary family folk.   In any case they were not police officers.  If you have a citation that would be useful.

They claimed radiation poisoning but claimed a lethal amount

I doubt that.  How would they know what a lethal dose was?  They were ordinary folk not radiologists.  Have you not thought this through?

They produced a fake photo later on of sunburn circles

Source please?  This sounds very anecdotal and lacking significance.

They claimed seeing air force on helicopters not used by the air force

Were Betty and Vickie military experts?  Did your mother or grandmother have an interest in military aviation?  Were they military helicopters?  Were they black ops?  Think these points through please

They claimed the light was vague and later on it was diamond shaped

If someone is shining a bright light in your face can you see the person holding the torch?  How do you feel when you face oncoming traffic at night time?  Again have you thought this through?

In the face of the Detective witness and the doctors reports I find your points to be extremely weak, not well thought through.  Please don't ever become a lawyer.  You won't win many cases on the basis of arguments like this.  The ladies were neither scientists not military experts.  You may do well to remember that.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
5 hours ago, Vaz said:

Nothing troublesome to the case here.

They claimed to know the exact spot they stopped and later could not

The road had apparently been repaired.  It was nightime.  They were disorientated by an extra-ordinary event.  They were just ordinary family folk.   In any case they were not police officers.  If you have a citation that would be useful.

They claimed radiation poisoning but claimed a lethal amount

I doubt that.  How would they know what a lethal dose was?  They were ordinary folk not radiologists.  Have you not thought this through?

They produced a fake photo later on of sunburn circles

Source please?  This sounds very anecdotal and lacking significance.

They claimed seeing air force on helicopters not used by the air force

Were Betty and Vickie military experts?  Did your mother or grandmother have an interest in military aviation?  Were they military helicopters?  Were they black ops?  Think these points through please

They claimed the light was vague and later on it was diamond shaped

If someone is shining a bright light in your face can you see the person holding the torch?  How do you feel when you face oncoming traffic at night time?  Again have you thought this through?

In the face of the Detective witness and the doctors reports I find your points to be extremely weak, not well thought through.  Please don't ever become a lawyer.  You won't win many cases on the basis of arguments like this.  The ladies were neither scientists not military experts.  You may do well to remember that.

The road repairs had not occurred till later. Good effort at faking the situation, But a fail. They claimed to have seen the burn marks at the exact location of the incident. Where are the photos of this? There are none. Smells like fraud doesn't it?

The doctor claimed a lethal dose. This is that same doctor that claimed no access to the medical records. Seems that the doctor and Cash and Landum needed to be more careful before making up their fairy tales.

The photos of the sunburn did not appear till the time they were to go on TV. How convenient. The stench of fraud is getting stronger.

Here is a straw man argument: "Were Betty and Vickie military experts? " How lame is that straw man argument? Reading English doe snot require any knowledge of the military. Then again, if they knew anything about the military they would not have come up with the dumb lies about the lettering on the helicopters. The odoriferous cloud of fraud is strong in this case. Soudns like someone needs to do some actual research. Cash and Landrum claimed they read lettering on the helicopters. Please do some reading on the case.

Another case of someone completely ignorant of the case. Their early stories ere of a vague light. Later stories were of a diamond shaped craft. Please learn what these frauds had to say before making a poor attempt at defending them.

Your arguments are incredibly embarrassing for you I imagine. The doctors did biopies and determined that the hair loss was alopecia areata. The doctors' reports are clear - no radiation whatsoever.

Please resist the effort to continue to embarrass yourself by not knowing what Case and Landrum told people.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
3 hours ago, stereologist said:

The road repairs had not occurred till later. Good effort at faking the situation, But a fail. They claimed to have seen the burn marks at the exact location of the incident. Where are the photos of this? There are none. Smells like fraud doesn't it?

The doctor claimed a lethal dose. This is that same doctor that claimed no access to the medical records. Seems that the doctor and Cash and Landum needed to be more careful before making up their fairy tales.

The photos of the sunburn did not appear till the time they were to go on TV. How convenient. The stench of fraud is getting stronger.

Here is a straw man argument: "Were Betty and Vickie military experts? " How lame is that straw man argument? Reading English doe snot require any knowledge of the military. Then again, if they knew anything about the military they would not have come up with the dumb lies about the lettering on the helicopters. The odoriferous cloud of fraud is strong in this case. Soudns like someone needs to do some actual research. Cash and Landrum claimed they read lettering on the helicopters. Please do some reading on the case.

Another case of someone completely ignorant of the case. Their early stories ere of a vague light. Later stories were of a diamond shaped craft. Please learn what these frauds had to say before making a poor attempt at defending them.

Your arguments are incredibly embarrassing for you I imagine. The doctors did biopies and determined that the hair loss was alopecia areata. The doctors' reports are clear - no radiation whatsoever.

Please resist the effort to continue to embarrass yourself by not knowing what Case and Landrum told people.

 

Your facts crushed his biased mostly made up opinions and embellishments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76

Why is it seems like in nearly every case you guys just completely ignore 90% of the story? Then go on to just make up, or believe as gospel the first opinion that agrees with your world view. Even though its often backed by nothing.

 

Anyhow I'm not saying it was swamp gas, but it was swamp gas.

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
8 hours ago, the13bats said:

Your facts crushed his biased mostly made up opinions and embellishments.

That's ridiculous. You know damn well neither of you even looked at the links that were posted. Not that it stopped you from laughing at them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
stereologist
36 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

That's ridiculous. You know damn well neither of you even looked at the links that were posted. Not that it stopped you from laughing at them.

That's simply not true. I did look at the links and that is why I saw the ridiculous inconsistencies in the stories.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

That's ridiculous. You know damn well neither of you even looked at the links that were posted. Not that it stopped you from laughing at them.

You have zero idea how much research over almost 40 years ive done on this case but i can tell who hasn't done much as they post the tripe, or just attack me.

What's ridiculous is a doctor says its radiation sickness, he didnt do one test that proved this and he said himself hes not allowed access to hostpital records, he's not a radiation poisioning expert by a long shot,

This doc also said her alleged amount is the same as people who were 3 to 5 miles from the epicenter of Hiroshima, wrong, 3 to 5 miles was a death zone, not opinion, fact.

Then not one but several doctors who are experts in radiation poisioning say if she had the amounts claimed she would be dead, one said it looked faked to him,

Countless other points like this in the cash case.

So do I believer someone trained in a field or someone just guessing? I believe the trained guy,  do i believe the guy parroting what he saw in some clickbait video or fakes from acclaimed experts, I'll take the experts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76

Attacking you? LOL. You literally laugh at every post made. Like that’s gonna bring a respectful conversation. 

Btw stereo, there are classic signs of radiation poisoning. You don’t need a test to claim it’s possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
3 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Attacking you? LOL. You literally laugh at every post made. Like that’s gonna bring a respectful conversation. 

Btw stereo, there are classic signs of radiation poisoning. You don’t need a test to claim it’s possible. 

I laugh at lots of silly funny stuff :tu:

You directed that at stereo but i replied about the alleged radiation, did you ignore it? No fair...could it have been? Perhaps but zero tests show it was only visual opinions by a doctor with an agenda and no expertise in the field and a ufologist also with an agenda,

Docs with expertise in the field say it would have killed her,

If a real document was produced saying better cash tested positive for radiation poisioning not "it looked like it" a real test result, find one and I will change how i view this case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

Attacking you? LOL. You literally laugh at every post made. Like that’s gonna bring a respectful conversation. 

Btw stereo, there are classic signs of radiation poisoning. You don’t need a test to claim it’s possible. 

Btw preacherman76, you should read what the state of Texas had to say about the symptoms.

The problem is that the woman had alopecia areata. That was based on evidence, not some comical claims such as those made by Cash and Landrum

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vaz
16 hours ago, stereologist said:

The road repairs had not occurred till later. Good effort at faking the situation, But a fail. They claimed to have seen the burn marks at the exact location of the incident. Where are the photos of this? There are none. Smells like fraud doesn't it?

The doctor claimed a lethal dose. This is that same doctor that claimed no access to the medical records. Seems that the doctor and Cash and Landum needed to be more careful before making up their fairy tales.

The photos of the sunburn did not appear till the time they were to go on TV. How convenient. The stench of fraud is getting stronger.

Here is a straw man argument: "Were Betty and Vickie military experts? " How lame is that straw man argument? Reading English doe snot require any knowledge of the military. Then again, if they knew anything about the military they would not have come up with the dumb lies about the lettering on the helicopters. The odoriferous cloud of fraud is strong in this case. Soudns like someone needs to do some actual research. Cash and Landrum claimed they read lettering on the helicopters. Please do some reading on the case.

Another case of someone completely ignorant of the case. Their early stories ere of a vague light. Later stories were of a diamond shaped craft. Please learn what these frauds had to say before making a poor attempt at defending them.

Your arguments are incredibly embarrassing for you I imagine. The doctors did biopies and determined that the hair loss was alopecia areata. The doctors' reports are clear - no radiation whatsoever.

Please resist the effort to continue to embarrass yourself by not knowing what Case and Landrum told people.

 

Corroborating witness testimony trumps imagined discepency.  

The only way you are going to succeed is if you can find a witness in the same area on the same night that testifies that the skies were empty.  No helicopters and no diamond shaped object.

A detective Sergeant as a witness is going to need a pretty big punch to knock out of the ring.  Then you still have to knock out Dr Rank (see post 41) and Dr Brian Mclelland.

They are both still in the ring.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
7 minutes ago, Vaz said:

Corroborating witness testimony trumps imagined discepency.  

The only way you are going to succeed is if you can find a witness in the same area on the same night that testifies that the skies were empty.  No helicopters and no diamond shaped object.

A detective Sergeant as a witness is going to need a pretty big punch to knock out of the ring.  Then you still have to knock out Dr Rank (see post 41) and Dr Brian Mclelland.

They are both still in the ring.

How laughable is that? LOL, corroborating testimony does not trump discrepancies. The discrepancies in the Cash Landrum case are widespread. They clearly show that this is a fairy tale.

NO I do not have to find a witness. The burden is on the supporter such as yourself to show that this is not a funny fairy tale.

The story is full of holes and huge discrepancies and obvious lies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

Post #41 is from a a report by the MUFON character caught in lies.

Schuessler was untruthful about:

  • burn marks on the road
  • that the exact location was known

Should anything be trusted when this is what is known for a fact. He apparently made up  the location baloney to claim seeing physical marks to make the story seem real.

Schuessler also kept important issues out of the book such as this portion of letter from Dr Rank

Quote

I think it is important to assure Betty that on the basis of the medical information you have provided me, that there are no signs of serious injury to date. You may also reassure Vicki that her cataract was probably a pre-existing condition and not necessarily related to her incident.

That sounds pretty important to mention but it was purposely kept out because it interfered with the narrative and the law suit they planned.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vaz
2 hours ago, stereologist said:

Post #41 is from a a report by the MUFON character caught in lies.

Schuessler was untruthful about:

  • burn marks on the road
  • that the exact location was known

Should anything be trusted when this is what is known for a fact. He apparently made up  the location baloney to claim seeing physical marks to make the story seem real.

Schuessler also kept important issues out of the book such as this portion of letter from Dr Rank

That sounds pretty important to mention but it was purposely kept out because it interfered with the narrative and the law suit they planned.

 

More unsubstantiated claims.  No sources.  No citations.  

Anyway did you manage to find that witness yet that saw an empty sky that night?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
10 hours ago, Vaz said:

More unsubstantiated claims.  No sources.  No citations.  

Anyway did you manage to find that witness yet that saw an empty sky that night?

How funny. All you have done is tell stories. No evidence whatsoever.

Apparently you can't even read and comprehend a short post.

The source is Schuessler. He claimed that there was physical evidence at the site. It was page 54 of his book. He claimed physical marks which he did not photograph. Bizarre right.

Then when asked for the exact location he writes a letter and says we don't know. It's between a beer hall and a highway sign.

I need to inform you yet again, I don't need to find anyone to tell of a clear sky. You, the supporter need to back up this ridiculous fairy tale with evidence. The onus is on the supporters.

Usually this demand to disprove a baloney story comes repeatedly from someone young who has little no experience in research and thinks that witnesses are always 100% correct.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
On 10/19/2019 at 3:02 AM, Vaz said:

There is nothing factual against the sighting.  Just skeptic opinion.  No one has provided any believable details just lots of unqualified speculation.

Not true you made that up.

You have made a lot of claims and posted your opinion as fact but you haven't posted your proof to back up your claims, you poke try to trigger but still you haven't backed up your opinions,

Please post your proof.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
23 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Why is it seems like in nearly every case you guys just completely ignore 90% of the story? Then go on to just make up, or believe as gospel the first opinion that agrees with your world view. Even though its often backed by nothing.

That's exactly what it is, a story.  What tests were done?  No radiation tests were conducted on the witnesses or the car.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Robotic Jew
17 hours ago, Vaz said:

More unsubstantiated claims.  No sources.  No citations.  

Anyway did you manage to find that witness yet that saw an empty sky that night?

I was there. I saw nothing but stars.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

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.