RAY SANTILI...YAR TILISAN...SAINTLY LIAR?

Alien?
Nothing has divided the UFO-communion as much as the Santili-film.
And nothing has surfaced that proves the film to be genuine. Only "paid off" statements from people gaining money on the situation and sceptic professionals within pathology and FX has spoken on the film. And the fact that some UFO-associations is helping to sell the film against a %-deal in provision from Merlin Productions, which is Santilis company in London, leaves a smelly trail of a sell-out.

Jörgen Westman


Many are the rumours around the famous Santili-autopsy-film. And I feel that it's time for an update of the sticky stream of statements around it.

Turners syndrome

Hutchins-Gilford William Moore comes forward with this hypothesis:
The creature on the autopsy-table can suffer from the Turners-syndrome.
According to Moore, the syndrome only attacks females. He tells us that the disease exploded in a village in a remote part of Brazil in the 60's, due to in-breeding. A B-Sci-Fi cameraman filmed the autopsy of two of the victims and that it is perhaps that film we now see as the Santili-film.

The Truly dangerous Company is a sceptic association (?) on the Internet who has put much effort to explain the hoax behind the film. First of all they have shown how easy it is to make a doll who looks and acts like the creature in the Santili-film.
One of their thesis, along with the FX-thesis, is that the person on the table has come down with the rare disease off Hutchinson-Gilford (see picture).



Santilis never ending changes of the story...

Reel 31 Lately Santili has changed course from connecting the film with the famous Roswell-crash, to say that it's probably from a crash that happened a month earlier near Socorro, New Mexico, west of Roswell and very close to the San Augustin Plains where Stanton T.Friedman claims a UFO crashed first week of July 1947.
Besides to lean on this new thesis Santili released copies of the sticker of the cans in which the film-reels (23 of them) were delivered (see picture). On them you can clearly see that the raw-film was developed in June and not July (when the Roswell-crash is supposed to have occured). Why haven't he realised this until now? He's been getting very much help from BUFORA:s chairman Philip Mantle, who should have realised something was very odd about the Roswell-story... Stanton T. Friedman claims, ofcourse, that the film is a hoax - Socorro isn't mentioned in the MJ-12-documents. There the first crash is the Roswell-crash.

The man who bought the (supposed) two autopsyfilms has shown to be a German porno-producer named Volker Spielberg (no connection with Steven.red). And in the highly entertaining sceptic-e-zine Saucer Smear it is claimed that Billy Meier-admirer Wendelle Stevens has been involved in promoting the film...

Bob Shell

Frames Santili has been accused of not being willing to release parts of the film to be examined for time and date of the origin. Everyone is still waiting (if you haven't allready decided that it's a hoax that is) for Kodak, who has produced the raw-film, to recive frames so that their experts can determine if the film is made in 1947, or at least manufactured before the incident was supposed to have happened. Santili didn't do it quite like that... He claim that he has turned to several private photographic-experts.
One of those is Bob Shell (no one else has stepped forward - if they exist..).
In an interview in the e-zine Wally World UFO Shell claims that the raw-film is either produced in 1927 or 1947, and not 1967 (as it has been suggested in several papers). Why? Well, appearantly Kodak changed the develope-process in 1957 regarding all 16 mm film. They also changed the chemicals in the raw-film and those chemicals can't be found (according to Shell) in the 3 (!) frames Santili has given him (see picture to the right) with the conclusion that the film must be produced before 1957. But there is absolutely nothing that says these 3 frames are taken from the actual film-reels...
Shell says that he has another round of frames (3 more) which shows the empty autopsy-room before the filming is taken place. Why aren't we allowed to see that? And why film an empty room? Things should have been quite caotic... Is there discrediting stuff on those 3 "empty-room"-frames?
Another explanation Shell has to why the film must be genuine is that it's impossible to find the developing-chemicals today that was used before 1957. With other words - you can no longer develope a film that old. But any chemistry-student at all can find the recipe (maybe from Kodak) and duplicate the chemicals needed.
I think I should add that Bob Shell is the only person who has Santilis permission to write a book about the verification of the reels... Maybe the book is allready released (who cares?), but inside it you can also find the story from the mysterious camerman J.B. Once again - a paid off judgement!

On to part 2 of the Santili-update


Back to content menu

GROOVE

All rights reserved to WUFOC and NÄRKONTAKT. If you reprint or quote any part of the content, you must give credit to: WUFOC, the free UFO-alternative on the Internet, http://www.tripnet.se/home/west/ufocentr.htm