From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 16:13:16 +0100 Archived: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 16:20:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >From: Kentaro Mori <kentaro.mori.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 09:15:57 -0300 >Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >>From: Michael Tarbell <mtarbell.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:29:49 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found ><snip> >>Assuming they were not colluding, is there any indication that >>Barauna could have known, prior to boarding, about the alleged >>previous sightings in the area and/or Bacellar's mission to >>gather information about them? >Yes. We do know that already in the trip to the Island there >were many comments about the previous flying saucer sightings. >Sources and details in our upcoming work. A few years ago when I wanted an answer to Mike's question, and when nobody was willing to share with me their copies of the ship's log, I calculated from known time and distance informatiin on the return trip and the speed and direction of ocean currents that that it must have taken, conservatively, at least six days to get to the island from Rio. Since she arrived on Jan14 this would mean that she left Rio on Jan 07, or Jan 08. I now have a copy of most of the ship's log, and as far as I can tell the ship did indeed depart Rio on the morning of Jan 08, but the more significant thing is that Barauna (with Amilar and Viegas) is recorded coming aboard on the morning of Jan 07. The first sighting on the island was on Dec 31 1957. It was reported to the Navy High Command in Capt. Bacellar's radiogram on that same date, Dec 31. So Barauna was already on the ship one week after the very _first_ incident _occurred on Trindade. That Dec 31 radiogram "gave origin to the present [Navy] investigation" according to Capt Brandao. (I'd still love to know what was in that first radiogram.) Pursuant to this, the Navy High Command's first instruction to Bacellar to provide "information on the phenomena observed and reported through the Radio[gram]", was dated Jan 6. This was the start of the Navy investigation leading up to Capt Brandao's intelligence report. Barauna was already on the ship only _one_day_ after this. Realistically, then, assuming that Barauna had a Navy contact that could tip him off almost immediately to the sighting mentioned in that first confidential radiogram (even before the Navy had decided to take any special interest) he had only a few days to experiment, plan the scenario of the hoax on the deck, photograph his model and prepare his doctored bi-pack film rolls (the only way to produce these photos in real time) by the night of Jan 6 ready for embarkation the following morning. Is this possible? - perhaps for a faker who by happy chance had an appropriate hoax scenario already in preparation? Maybe, but I don't think it's comfortable. <snip> >I admit that the idea of Bacellar being part of the hoax sounds >absurd to me. That said, it's really bizarre that: he was the >one who first claimed the UFO appeared in the negatives - >contrary even to Barauna's first impression, I find this amusing. I pointed this out in strong terms years ago and wrote about it on my web pages. The argument used to be (e.g., Tim Priinty) that this Bacellar person must have been suggestible and would have thought any old seagull or speck of dust on the negative was a flying saucer when the charismatic Barauna told him there was one there. Of course this misrepresented Capt Bacellar, who was not only a Superior Navy Corps officer but a high technically-savvy engineer responsible almost single-handedly for Brazil's upper atmsophere meteorological study programme and for the building of the Trindade Oceanographic Post of which he was also operational Commander. It also misrepresented the situation because, as you point out, far from hypnotising everybody with persuasive claims Barauna came out and said he thought there was probably nothing visible on the film at all. It was Capt Bacellar who made a "careful examination" and showed Barauna that the object was there. >he was the one who >tranquilized Barauna saying he could take the film home, he was >the one who escorted Barauna to the Navy Secret Service, You are neglecting what made Bacellar a special actor at the centre of this drama: He was the man who had been instructed by the Navy High Command to gather information on UFO incidents at the island. He had the authority of rank, the further authority of specific orders, the technical background, and the enormous practical advantage that he was on the spot. He was expected to do whatever he judged needed to be done, and he was "summoned" to the Navy High Command Intelligence Department on Jan 27 to "present his report" to Capt Brandao, which he did. He didn't just pitch up there for fun. >along with Barauna were the only two questioned witnesses who >had their statements recorded for the favourable Intelligence >Report, I repeat, Capt Bacellar was the Navy's investigator on the spot. He was given official responsibility. He was summoned to present his findings in person to Capt Brandao so that the latter could make an intelligence evaluation for his superiors. The latter's report is an intelligence assessment based on _conclusions_ reached by the Navy's investigating agent on the spot. It does not purport to contain all sources and background information developed by Bacellar in the course of his investigations. Brandao says "CC Bacellar brought to this High Command the man who had taken the photographs". Barauna was interviewed and handed over the negatives which Brandao sent out for technical examinations. Brandao's report is also an intelligence assessment based on information provided by Barauna and conclusions reached by the technicians. It does not purport to contain all technical information developed by the technicians in their examinations. >and to me most puzzling of all, he gave a quite >favourable statement to Cruzeiro magazine even after Barauna's >previous hoax had been widely exposed in the press. As you say, it strongly suggests that he had no reasonable doubt about the sighting or Barauna's photographs. Even knowing that Barauna was capable of trick shots, it seems that Bacellar's inquiries on board, including the "careful inspection" he said he made of those negatives after development, were very convincing to him. >Also: it seems the previous sightings were not seen by everyone >on the Island. That is, rather than being a "common" phenomenon >sighted several times in the Island by several different groups, >the sightings actually happened only to some groups of people, >while others were completely oblivious to them - even while >knowing about the rumours. And Bacellar was the one who was in >charge when most of the known sightings happened. I have no idea what you are attempting to imply here. Can you expand on the point? Regards Martin Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp