McMinnville (1950)

[ChrisPerridas]

I have not seen any postings here on this. It seems to be the talk of December.

Mr. Tony Bragalia brought forth a new review of this information, and several sites and blogs picked up and have been discussing it. Information that had been previously scattered, is now being collected at those sites and much discussion.

The Bragalia Files: THE MCMINNVILLE UFO “LADDER BOY” BROUHAHA

A Different Perspective: The Trent Photographs Reexamined

plus lots of comments:

Blogger: A Different Perspective - Post a Comment

and at ATS:

McMinnville UFO photographs real or fake ?, page 7

and the original Life article

LIFE - Google Books

Anyone else read these reports?

[dr wu23]

Originally Posted by ChrisPerridas

I have not seen any postings here on this. It seems to be the talk of December.

Mr. Tony Bragalia brought forth a new review of this information, and several sites and blogs picked up and have been discussing it. Information that had been previously scattered, is now being collected at those sites and much discussion.

The Bragalia Files: THE MCMINNVILLE UFO “LADDER BOY” BROUHAHA

A Different Perspective: The Trent Photographs Reexamined

plus lots of comments:

Blogger: A Different Perspective - Post a Comment

and at ATS:

McMinnville UFO photographs real or fake ?, page 7

and the original Life article

LIFE - Google Books

Anyone else read these reports?

Thanks for the links of the boy on the ladder and the mom, etc.
There have always been questions about the McMinnville/Trent case from skeptics and the Trent photos have been questioned for several years now recently , but I had never heard of the boy on the ladder pic before.
So does this put the proverbial nail in the coffin or is the case still considered a possibility of a real ufo pic?

[Carol Nistri]

Oh Yee of little faith!

[dr wu23]

Originally Posted by Carol Nistri

Oh Yee of little faith!

Oh yee of too much unfounded faith.

[ChrisPerridas]

Be nice, it's Christmas.

Like an idiot, yes, I read almost all the comments and looked at all the links. I'm a glutton for this stuff. I have a bias as I am a fan of Mr. Bragalia's work. He does interesting things, but in this case, he initially made an error that was quickly clarified.

The "boy on the ladder" was not taken by Trent, but by a Life photographer. Dr. Rudiak (I believe) and maybe Oberg, all collected the Life images while they were on google, and have been removed now. No reason given, as Life images still remain.

There were, I think, 40, and only a few have been circulated outside of those kept on private hard drives. Oberg released the boy on the ladder and admits he did so to thwart the McMinnville case, and did so seemingly deceptive. I think he regrets this now.

The images cannot be compared as Trent had a box camera, and Life had expensive equipment, and taken by a true professional. However, the farm, the foliage, and so forth is within a few weeks of each other. The same wires can be seen. The photog. probably thought the kid was cute, and took his picture on a ladder, but the ladder was not high enough in itself to stage anything.

The concensus by ATS and Mr Bragalia concludes Trent forged the images. Bragalia has a hand written note on an image to Trent that alludes to his forgery, and ATS makes a reasonable, albeit arguable, case that it was a pot lid suspended from one of the main wires, perhaps a telephone wire, I'm not sure. Image enhancement may show the string, and the box camera plus the hazy day may have washed the suspension line out as it did many of the other wires.

Mrs. Trent was a believer, and apparently saw flying saucers from time to time before this photographic event. If so, this would mean that from summer 1947 to the 11 May 1950 hoax, the Trents discussed flying discs with each other - for well more than 2 years.

Skeptics have long believed it was a hoax, but rarely had evidence to proof. It seems Mr. Bragalia has a possible smoking gun with his evidence - a hand written comment on a photo, that Trent enjoyed posing with his new camera and Mrs. Trent enjoyed thinking about flying discs. They seemed to enjoy the fun. Though Trent lived in a rural area, he had an almost brand new car in 1950, so he was not a rustic, poverty stricken guy.

Mr. Randle has weighed in on the Bragalia data in his blog, and in the comments section he took several to task and asked them to either quit snarking or stop visiting his blog and to just stop commenting there, period. I think that hints that he may begin reviewing comments and not allowing some to post in the future.

The circumstantial evidence of the event I reviewed before this recent December post. I'm no one, but I found that the original local newspaper reports found the images interesting enough to put on the AP wire, and that the local bank and others felt it might be noteworthy for tourism, that being a very 1950 thing at the time. Trent seemed to enjoy the brief notoriety, but he was not in a hurry to release them as it took a month to take the rest of the film.

Then he left the negatives with the newspaper for a long time, and then realized they may be worth something and asked for them back. So the whole thing seemed weird to me. The 50 year review of the grandchildren and residents left no lasting interest. That seemed to imply nothing big deal had happened.

I think bottom line, like so many from this time period, Mrs. Trent believed, and Mr. Trent wanted to have a little fun with his male peers, though not really at their expense. I don't think there was anything malicious. It just got out of hand.

[ChrisPerridas]

[starman2003]

I don't buy this. Wasn't bragalia the one behind the recent "debunking" of socorro? The varghina "debunking" is also unconvincing, to say the least and so is this. As far as I know the Trents never publicly recanted, which they would have had it been meant only as a bit of fun. So what if mrs talked about saucers--millions did back then. And a pot lid was hardly big enough given the estimates of experts.
Btw in KDR's blog I read the note on the photo, which really says or proves nothing.

[ChrisPerridas]

as always, appreciate your perspective!

[Skeptical]

I'll not sugar coat this - I think Bragalia is full of ****. His approach to journalism is to take the slightest shred of evidence and blow it up into a blockbuster revelation. His writing has been like this since Day One. Don't get me wrong, the Trent photos still have a 50% chance of being a hoax but I'm not going to thrown them in the out-basket based on anything Bragalia has to say.

S

[ChrisPerridas]

Nope, no sugar coating there.

As I stated, I enjoy reading Mr. Bragalia's work. I will continue to do so.

But, I'll be equally blunt. 2012 has been the most disappointing and depressing year for me with respect to aliens. This was the year that I was going to reconcile this thing once and for all. It is why I joined this forum. I was going to get that evidence I knew was out there.

I have yet to find one example that I have pursued with open heart and open mind this year that has held water. I've reviewed, and reread, and spent countless hours on those old musty reports, all those books on my book shelf, all those many newspaper reports, and files on the internet, and reading brand new reports.

Not one. None of them have a shred of evidence that proves "aliens" have visited this planet. Not now, not a zillion years ago, nothing, nada.

I think I would have been better off not to have looked so closely. But it's too late for me. It is done.

If you are believers, keep believing. Enjoy.