Ron James UFO crashed UFO pictures

[Calter]

Ron James, MUFON's Director Of Media Relations, recently showed in an interview a picture of a "ufo crash scene" (as a tease for a film)


here's the picture (and the original reddit post about it)

r/UFOs got to work with it and it's not looking good for the validity of the picture

Here's a clearer version of the image, from some redditor that apparently bought them from someone at UFO fest (source)


Here's another person that also saw this particular photo at "McMinnville UFO festival", selling them at $10 (source)



So, this is a picture that apparently has made its way around people that sell pictures of UFOs, and as far as I know there is no known source.

As clearer versions of the image began to pop up, the image looked more and more dubious (for example, one soldier seems to have brought a chair to sit on the UFO), some people pointed out that the soldiers look a lot like Army Men toys, and a few hours ago somebody found a nice match.

Pretty clear all three "people" in the photo are exact matches to the miniatures above. Particularly compare the position of the arm of the guy seated against the tree, the hat on the guy standing, and the position of the guy seated. Also notice the guy standing is wearing a flat topped hat and the guy sitting is wearing a German style helmet.

So yeah, this post might serve in the future in case the image becomes more popular in the future.


As a bonus, a recreation of seemingly the same event was drawn for the book "Ominous" by Wayne Sturgill (source)



I don't know anything about the book, but the "recreation" is clearly just an artist doing a drawing of the picture (which is likely a fake done with miniature soldiers), so that's not a good sign about the research that went into it.

 

[JMartJr]

The "saucer" is odd -- it is not symmetrical. Almost looks like a soft latex something-or-other sort of deforming to mold itself against the scenery. I suspect it is something that will be pretty recognizable if anybody can find it and give us all a huge AH HAH! moment. Did not find it among the world of toy plastic fried eggs. Which are probably too small anyway...

 

[MapperGuy]

Ron James, MUFON's Director Of Media Relations, recently showed in an interview a picture of a "ufo crash scene" (as a tease for a film)


here's the picture (and the original reddit post about it)

r/UFOs got to work with it and it's not looking good for the validity of the picture

Here's a clearer version of the image, from some redditor that apparently bought them from someone at UFO fest (source)


Here's another person that also saw this particular photo at "McMinnville UFO festival", selling them at $10 (source)



So, this is a picture that apparently has made its way around people that sell pictures of UFOs, and as far as I know there is no known source.

As clearer versions of the image began to pop up, the image looked more and more dubious (for example, one soldier seems to have brought a chair to sit on the UFO), some people pointed out that the soldiers look a lot like Army Men toys, and a few hours ago somebody found a nice match.





So yeah, this post might serve in the future in case the image becomes more popular in the future.


As a bonus, a recreation of seemingly the same event was drawn for the book "Ominous" by Wayne Sturgill (source)



I don't know anything about the book, but the "recreation" is clearly just an artist doing a drawing of the picture (which is likely a fake done with miniature soldiers), so that's not a good sign about the research that went into it.

The postures of the three people in the photo do look rather "wooden" (or in this case plastic). Legs too straight and arm bent at odd angle.

The tone and texture of the photo also have an unnatural look to them, but that could be explained away by this being a many generations copies of copies.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Here's another person that also saw this particular photo at "McMinnville UFO festival", selling them at $10 (source)



So, this is a picture that apparently has made its way around people that sell pictures of UFOs, and as far as I know there is no known source.

Oh damn!! I really wanted to go to the UFO festival in McMinnville. I coulda had my own version of this "smoking gun" photo. Framed no less. There's always next year and hopefully a better photo to buy.

 

[Mendel]

Oh damn!! I really wanted to go to the UFO festival in McMinnville. I coulda had my own version of this "smoking gun" photo. Framed no less. There's always next year and hopefully a better photo to buy.

You should bring your own hoax pictures to sell...

 

[Ann K]

The "saucer" is odd -- it is not symmetrical. Almost looks like a soft latex something-or-other sort of deforming to mold itself against the scenery. I suspect it is something that will be pretty recognizable if anybody can find it and give us all a huge AH HAH! moment. Did not find it among the world of toy plastic fried eggs. Which are probably too small anyway...

The model soldiers are stated to be 1/35 scale. That would make the standing soldier about 2 inches tall, so the UFO is about 14 to 16 inches long before it goes out of frame, if that helps identify it. Of course, if it's a photo composite, it could be any size.

 

[JMartJr]

The model soldiers are stated to be 1/35 scale. That would make the standing soldier about 2 inches tall, so the UFO is about 14 to 16 inches long before it goes out of frame, if that helps identify it. Of course, if it's a photo composite, it could be any size.

I suppose it could be a composite, some of the background foliage looks more real than the soldiers do! But something about it feels like a diorama to me, in which case some of the more distant branches and shrubs MAY be on a photograph mounted as a background. Time spent searching "diorama German soldiers flying saucer" (or boulder, or pillbox, or cinnamon bun!) did not find anything similar -- those last searched in case it was an existing display in some small museum that from the right angle just happened to look something like a misshapen flying saucer, rather than a purpose-made saucer display.

 

[FatPhil]

Ron James, MUFON's Director Of Media Relations, recently showed in an interview a picture of a "ufo crash scene" (as a tease for a film)

Sorry to be lazy, but I'm going to invoke my "no click" rights, and ask what Ron James said about the the photo, how credulous or critical was he of it as evidence, how much effort had he put into analysing it? I'll take a summarised paraphrase, I'm just trying to evaluate the reliability of the source in case it's needed in a future prior.

 

[Ann K]

I suppose it could be a composite, some of the background foliage looks more real than the soldiers do!

The model soldiers are 1/35 scale."O" scale is 1/48, not all that different. The scene could well be utilizing foliage intended for the model train market.

However, I'm leaning to the photo composite hypothesis. If you look closely at the photo, bottom right corner, it appears to be sitting on or beside a roadway, double yellow line included. (Edit to add: that corner of the photo appears to be blacked out in the version being held by James as an ad for the movie, but is clearly visible on the photo-for-sale.) As for the UFO itself, it looks as if it's the roof of something like a futuristic model car, and we only have their word for it that it's a 1955 photo, so that doesn't narrow down the date of such a model.

 

[Mick West]

The "saucer" is odd -- it is not symmetrical. Almost looks like a soft latex something-or-other sort of deforming to mold itself against the scenery. I suspect it is something that will be pretty recognizable if anybody can find it and give us all a huge AH HAH! moment.

A correspondent suggested the saucer shape might be a 1950s style hat


That's labeled a "Cartwheel Hat", although most cartwheel hats have a more raised centers.


It's not a perfect match, and looking like something can be misleading.

 

[John J.]

we only have their word for it that it's a 1955 photo

I think it's post-1984:

The 1/35 figures are made by Tamiya, a well-known Japanese model kit and radio-controlled car producer.
Their first plastic kit of figures came out in 1968. They are multi-part assembly kits, like Testors, Revell, Airfix etc.

1968 – 1:35 German Tank Soldier Set; the first product in the Military Miniature Series.

Content from External Source

Wikipedia, Tamiya Corporation, Timeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamiya_Corporation

The German Soldiers at Rest Military Miniatures set 35129 was released in 1984


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Tamiya_product_lines

The box cover doesn't give Tamiya's catalogue number, but fortunately I found a model-devoted website that connects "our" troops to 35129

https://www.mech9.com/2019/10/135-tamiya-german-soldiers-at-rest.html

The catalogue number system has changed over time, 35129 is the current number for what has also been listed as 3629.

Hobbyists often make their figures more original by "transplanting" pieces, and by using modelling knives, files and epoxy putty marketed for that specific purpose (I was one!)

Ron James' photo appears to show these figures "built from the box" which many modellers would consider a bit lazy.
(Maybe the forage-cap head has been used on the other standing figure, who has his back to us in the photo).
Luckily it also makes this hoax easy to debunk!

 

[tobigtofool]

(as a tease for a film)

Why is it people fall for this stuff every single time.

 

[Calter]

Sorry to be lazy, but I'm going to invoke my "no click" rights, and ask what Ron James said about the the photo, how credulous or critical was he of it as evidence, how much effort had he put into analysing it? I'll take a summarised paraphrase, I'm just trying to evaluate the reliability of the source in case it's needed in a future prior.

He doesn't say much about the photo itself, he showed them briefly as a teaser for the movie (and stated that they are copyrighted so he can't show them too much).

The context of him showing the photo is that one of the cases in this movie is about someone's dad being part of a secret UFO hunting squadron in the 50s. Apparently, they flew F-94s, a UFO shot down one of the jets and the jets in turn shot down the F-94 UFO. According to their investigation, there was indeed a squadron of F-94 jets that were in a civil defense airwing in the airport that the dude claimed and it was disbanded around the time the UFO was supposedly shot down.

He gives a few reasons as to why it's compelling and the pictures are one of the things he uses to make the story seem compelling. He says, "to make this even more compelling, he (the pilot's son) has pictures" and proceeds to show three pictures, one of which is the one on the post (and to be honest, it is the most compelling of the three, and that's saying something). There's apparently more pictures, but he hasn't shown them.

It's always hard to tell how much effort these people actually put into analyzing data, but he says he has been trying to debunk the story and he hasn't been able to.

 

[Mick West]

I found another photo of the models:


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Scalemodel/comments/18k0xv9/une_paix_bien_m%C3%A9rit%C3%A9e_miniart_checkpoint_tamiya/




The hats are interchangable.

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/tamiya-35129-soldiers-at-rest--132562


It's hard to say if it's 100%, but it's certainly pretty close.

 

[Mauro]

Apparently, they flew F-94s, a UFO shot down one of the jets and the jets in turn shot down the F-94.

I guess it should have been 'and the jets in turn shot down the UFO'?

Were I an alien, knowing an F-94 can shoot down my alien craft in a dogfight...

would make me stay very, very far from any place with F-22's or F-35's, but even Eurofighters...

By Chris Lofting - http://www.airliners.net/photo/UK---Air/Eurofighter-EF-2000-Typhoon/1189137/L/, GFDL 1.2, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20654565

 

[Calter]

Apparently, Ron James has responded to the "debunking" of the photo.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bm71rg9GzoY


I haven't watched the whole video, and skimming through it the second part just seems more like casual rambling. The part where he does directly address the idea of it being a diorama/having toy soldiers is this bit at 3:20

We considered that and we would still consider it, but we haven't found anything that definitively proves it, and there's a couple things about that image that if i was going to build the scene in that manner, I wouldn't do it that way. I wouldn't have these two gigantic tree trunks that look big and out of place in the scene, but they are consistent with the kind of trees that are in that part of the country.

We haven't dismissed the idea that maybe that's the result

But the other thing to consider is that this is one of about 20 pictures and there's a whole bunch of other corroborating evidence of this story and we are investigating all of them and at the end of the day we are presenting what we find and we are on the side of the truth, so if this thing ends up being debunked it's not going to be because Ron James or MUFON or anybody else went out and tried to convince the world that it was real, we are going to present out findings and we are going to make that available for other people and if that turns out to be a solid case, then it does, and if it doesn't then that's okay.

I think they also address the fact that there's a book with a drawing of the picture, if anyone's interested in that.

 

[PublicStranger]

Could this not just be an AI generated photo? Maybe somebody uploaded a copy of the sketch onto one of these AI bots. Would explain why it looks unnatural and why one of the trees is in the foreground on the sketch but in the background in the photo.

Can't quite work out what's happening on the far right of this photo, looks really blurred.

 

[Ann K]

Can't quite work out what's happening on the far right of this photo, looks really blurred.

I just edited my post to point out that the photo he is holding is obviously the same as the photo for sale ...EXCEPT for that darkening on the lower right. That obscures the fact that in the photo for sale, there's a lighter road surface visible, and a visible dark "base" under the UFO. James' photo is an obvious manipulation of the second photo.

 

[PublicStranger]

I just edited my post to point out that the photo he is holding is obviously the same as the photo for sale ...EXCEPT for that darkening on the lower right. That obscures the fact that in the photo for sale, there's a lighter road surface visible, and a visible dark "base" under the UFO. James' photo is an obvious manipulation of the second photo.

Is the road part of the photo or is it just a reflection on the glass of the frame?

 

[Ann K]

Is the road part of the photo or is it just a reflection on the glass of the frame?

Ooh, good question! The background rocks and foliage look the same, and in the one for sale the road and the foliage all seem to go together. If anything, it looks to me as if the bottom LEFT might be a reflection, with the orange reflection of someone's fingers (holding a camera?) and possibly the dark shadow of his body in a dark sweater causing what I read as being the "base" to the UFO. I've had no luck finding another of the same photo.

 

[Domzh]

Could this not just be an AI generated photo? Maybe somebody uploaded a copy of the sketch onto one of these AI bots. Would explain why it looks unnatural and why one of the trees is in the foreground on the sketch but in the background in the photo.

Can't quite work out what's happening on the far right of this photo, looks really blurred.

at the very least you could have put in a minimal amount of effort and read the main post. they were able to track down the miniature soldiers used to create the scenery and they are perfect matches. no ai.

 

[John J.]

No real doubt that the figures are Tamiya's German Soldiers At Rest.

The rightmost figure has jackboots. and while the picture isn't clear enough to be certain, the back of his helmet suggests the flared rear of the German Stahlhelm design, not the much more rounded American M1 helmet.

 

[Mendel]

No real doubt that the figures are Tamiya's German Soldiers At Rest.

You had me at the soldier sitting on a chair. I can't imagine a UFO retrieval team bringing chairs, and setting them up right next to the UFO.

 

[Duke]

I guess it should have been 'and the jets in turn shot down the UFO'?

Were I an alien, knowing an F-94 can shoot down my alien craft in a dogfight...

would make me stay very, very far from any place with F-22's or F-35's, but even Eurofighters...

By Chris Lofting - http://www.airliners.net/photo/UK---Air/Eurofighter-EF-2000-Typhoon/1189137/L/, GFDL 1.2, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20654565

The F-94 might have been somewhat pedestrian in performance, but the C model packed quite a punch with 48 2.75 inch folding fin aerial rockets....nicknamed "Mighty Mouse." They could be ripple fired or expended in a single salvo. What they lacked in accuracy they made up for in potency and sheer numbers.


Source: https://youtu.be/yP7Oxx8AY2c?si=OhX7q34QND9UxIbU
Video of mostly F-89s salvoing Mouse Mouse rockets, particularly at about 1:24 through the end. Shotgun approach to aerial combat.


Rockets in nose and wing pods of F-94C. No guns, rockets its only armament.
https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/V...splay/Article/198078/lockheed-f-94c-starfire/

Should be easy to confirm if there were F-94s stationed in the vicinity of the alleged crash site. F-94s were not aerially refuelable, and like all early jets used fuel at very high rates. Figure endurance on an F-94 would have been a couple hours max, so a reasonable guess would be the a/c would have been based at an air field no more than 200-300 miles from the shootdown site. I'd look for ANG units first, assuming the 1955 date identified in the photo caption (see @Calter initial post) is the date of the incident. By 1955, the F-94s were starting to leave the active duty inventory.

Speaking of the photo caption, it says the flying saucer was shot down by "RED WING pilots" flying F-94s. I'm pretty sure that's a reference to the red wing and tail color scheme used on Air Defense Command (ADC) jets at the time. The idea was the red painted surfaces would be easier to spot from the air if the aircraft was forced/shot down over the Great White North while intercepting Soviet bombers. I remember seeing that term used to describe ADC aircraft in old aviation magazines of that period.

 

[PublicStranger]

'Crashed flying saucer surrounded by 3 soldiers in the woods'

Took 3 seconds to generate this image on a simple image generator app.

 

[NorCal Dave]

'Crashed flying saucer surrounded by 3 soldiers in the woods'

Took 3 seconds to generate this image on a simple image generator app.

I think we’ll be seeing a lot more of this in the future. In this case I think it’s pretty compelling that the model solders were used. While it may not date back to the ‘50s, if someone was selling copies in McMinnville a few weeks ago it would appear the photo has been around for a bit. Probably pre dating the current AI image generators that are becoming common now.

But we should be bracing for a wave of AI UFO photos.

 

[Alexandria Nick]

Should be easy to confirm if there were F-94s stationed in the vicinity of the alleged crash site. F-94s were not aerially refuelable, and like all early jets used fuel at very high rates. Figure endurance on an F-94 would have been a couple hours max, so a reasonable guess would be the a/c would have been based at an air field no more than 200-300 miles from the shootdown site. I'd look for ANG units first, assuming the 1955 date identified in the photo caption (see @Calter initial post) is the date of the incident. By 1955, the F-94s were starting to leave the active duty inventory.

Speaking of the photo caption, it says the flying saucer was shot down by "RED WING pilots" flying F-94s. I'm pretty sure that's a reference to the red wing and tail color scheme used on Air Defense Command (ADC) jets at the time. The idea was the red painted surfaces would be easier to spot from the air if the aircraft was forced/shot down over the Great White North while intercepting Soviet bombers. I remember seeing that term used to describe ADC aircraft in old aviation magazines of that period.

The 123rd Fighter Interceptor Squadron (interestingly, the Red Hawks) flew F-94As between 1955 and 1957, out of Portland. Only about 50 miles away from the supposed action.

That part of the story is at least consistent with reality.

 

[John J.]

Ron James' photo is black-and-white; the McMinnville photo is in colour.

Unless the McMinnville photo has been artificially coloured post-photo, there must be a chance the McMinnville photo is the original, or is closer to the original image than James' is.

Looking at McMinnville again,





Edit: Maybe saucer and two figures at left are part of diorama on dark base, figure on right is posed in a fortuitous houseplant on / near windowsill but not actually attached to the diorama.

I'm guessing the photographer is the person photographing the item for sale at McMinnville.

The McMinnville image might be of a military/ SF diorama (we know it is because of the 1/35 troops) photographed indoors, in front of a window.
Dampen down the colour so the anomalous field-grey (Feldgrau) uniforms aren't so obvious,
do a bit of filling-in at the right of the picture to obscure domestic fixtures and fittings....

....and hey presto, you've got a saucer recovery photo Rob James can believe in!

 

[MonkeeSage]

Ron James' photo is black-and-white; the McMinnville photo is in colour.

Unless the McMinnville photo has been artificially coloured post-photo, there must be a chance the McMinnville photo is the original, or is closer to the original image than James' is.

So it looks like the McMinnville UFO festival is held outdoors along a street(s) lined with trees and the vendors set up their booths along the side of the road.



This would fit what appears to be a fold-out table sitting on asphalt in the photo from McMinnville.



Given that, I think we are seeing a reflection of actual trees and other buildings in glass of the framed print that just makes it appear to be colored.

 

[JMartJr]

Given that, I think we are seeing a reflection of actual trees and other buildings in glass of the framed print that just makes it appear to be colored.

If that were the case, wouldn't the reflections likely continue down into the UFO? As in fact the reflection of the photographer does.

I'm guessing the photographer is the person photographing the item for sale at McMinnville.

I agree.

 

[John J.]

I think we are seeing a reflection of actual trees and other buildings in glass of the framed print that just makes it appear to be colored.

I don't know- you might be right.

But it seems to me the lightish green colour on the right of the McMinnville photo follows the contours present in the B+W photo quite well. And the sky in the McMinnville photo is reflecting blue, the area the rightmost soldier is sitting on is reflecting green.

 

[MonkeeSage]

But it seems to me the lightish green colour on the right of the McMinnville photo follows the contours present in the B+W photo quite well. And the sky in the McMinnville photo is reflecting blue, the area the rightmost soldier is sitting on is reflecting green.

I see what you mean. I was seeing the reflections and thinking the colored bits were also tree foliage.

 

[gargamel]

It is fairly common to take diorama photos outdoors, in sunlight and with natural backdrop, really adds to it. So my guess is that the foilage in the back is real, so to speak.

 

[FatPhil]

I think it's post-1984:

If we're much more recent than that, there's a decent chance there's data printed on the back of the photo that could help. Even if it's older, the branding of the paper could give some clues.

 

[FatPhil]

Apparently, Ron James has responded to the "debunking" of the photo.
...

We considered that and we would still consider it, but we haven't found anything that definitively proves it, and there's a couple things about that image that if i was going to build the scene in that manner, I wouldn't do it that way.

Content from External Source

I feel this logical antipattern ought to have a fallacy name: "If I were to fake it, I'd fake it differently, so it can't be a fake." It's not an exact match for any I can think of.

 

[Mendel]

I feel this logical antipattern ought to have a fallacy name: "If I were to fake it, I'd fake it differently, so it can't be a fake." It's not an exact match for any I can think of.

I think it's a special case of argument from incredulity. "I can't imagine they faked it like that."

 

[John J.]

If I get it right, James' logic is

"If I were to fake a crashed UFO in Oregon in the 1950s I'd use one of the many model sets of US soldiers.

These are World War 2 German soldiers, so it's more likely to be real."

 

[tobigtofool]

It is fairly common to take diorama photos outdoors, in sunlight and with natural backdrop, really adds to it. So my guess is that the foilage in the back is real, so to speak.

Here's a nice one for context.

Considering nobody has ever come out as the creator, I'd imagine the diorama was made by someone who was both old and pretty lonely and just thought it would be a fun project. Then they pass away, and now we have this snake oil salesman using it to sell an informational documentary.

https://rrmodelcraftsman.com/a-hot-shot-diorama/


C

 

[MonkeeSage]

John Greenwald released a statement from Ron James. Mr. James now agrees it is a diorama.

Below is a statement sent to me last night from Ron James, the filmmaker who released the attached photo.

[image from OP]

I wanted to disseminate it, in full.
--
When I chose to show these images from an ongoing investigation to various audiences, I was inviting the community to help us get to the bottom of their authenticity.

The presence of a third matching individual in another version of this shot concurs, in my opinion, that this is indeed a diorama constructed using that kit, which we found out is “German Soldiers at Rest” from 1984.

Neither myself, nor MUFON tried to “sell” the veracity of these images. We shared the story we were told in the current state of our investigation.

We are very proud of members of the UFO community for helping to solve the mystery of this photo.

We are also embarrassed and ashamed at the sheer nastiness of some people who clearly have no problem spewing venom from the safety of their keyboards.

All of the negative comments about charging $100 for the live stream of our symposium are not justified.

That price Includes a year of MUFON TV and access to the entire symposium, live or later.

It is the least expensive live stream of a symposium at this level anywhere. It costs a lot of money to put on an event like this. It’s a lot of hard work and a lot of people working practically for free.

As for trying to make money off a film, most of your favorite UFO filmmakers, including myself, Dr. Greer, James Fox, Darcy Weir, Carolyn Corey and more were all deprived of our royalties last year by people we trusted.

My film “Accidental Truth”, won 28 awards and grossed over a million dollars worldwide. I spent a lot of my life savings to make it. I have not been paid one penny of my royalties. which is well into the 6 figures. Yet I continue to work for this cause.

We still continue to pursue this labor of love and true intention to get to the truth, even if we have to debunk stuff to get there.

I think we have a pretty good example here of the community coming together to solve a mystery.

Unfortunately, in the sheer nastiness of some individuals, we also have a pretty good example of why the aliens are not talking to us.

-- Ron James

Content from External Source

Source: x.com/blackvaultcom/status/1805929510573060336

 

[Ann K]

(Quoting Ron James) Unfortunately, in the sheer nastiness of some individuals, we also have a pretty good example of why the aliens are not talking to us.

Ron is fessing up because he's been caught, and it wasn't his group that did the work; it was the "nasty" people who actually brought some facts, the nerve of them! But he still sticks in a nonsense statement like that at the end of his confession, so I'm going to assume he doesn't really want to be taken seriously in his search for "truth".