Talk:Alien autopsy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Paranormal (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Skepticism (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Original Air Date[edit]

I remember watching this as a child during the 90s. When and where was the first broadcast of this video? I think I saw it on Channel 4 - it was quite heavily advertised - did the UK show it before Fox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.151.215 (talk) 03:56, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

No. It was shown the day before in Italy, then it was braodcasted around the world on the same day. Fox then replayed the show 3 more times, adding more material to it's running time. They added the "Tent Footage" by the end of it run. Later, the Tent Footage was a proven to be a hoax but the Autopsy and the Debris footage was not a proven hoax until much later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enzoab (talkcontribs) 13:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Sky One Documentary[edit]

Sky One have a documentary on this on the 4th of April that looks to finally put this one to bed [1] . Also a mention of the Ant and Dec film [2] might be worthwhile (Emperor 13:29, 31 March 2006 (UTC))

first of all, can you elaborate on that,second of all why isnt this article called alien atopsy and instead a mans name who is mentioned in this article only by what he did?192.30.202.28 21:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Not sure which bit you want me to elaborate on but you can now read my review of the documentary [3] which, I hope, addresses whatever queries you had. Basically what Santilli now claims is close to the plot of the film - he faked the alien autopsy footage but only because he bought the real footage of an alien autopsy which was (unfortunately/fortuitously) degraded. There is a lot more discussion out there - I have brought some of the best stuff I could find together [4] - if you have any specific questions then I'll see what I can do about answering them (Emperor 01:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC))

Come on! It's a fake! Where's the debate?![edit]

The debate on whether the autopsied body is a very realistic mannequin, a girl with a genetic disorder (such as progeria or Turner's syndrome), or a real alien is still going on. It is also questionable whether the film material and the equipments and objects in the autopsy room actually date to the time in question. Pathologists have also questioned the techniques being used in the supposed autopsy. - it's an admitted fake hence the Ant & Dec film. Jooler 21:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I changed "still going on" to "continued for years". Do more corrections need to be made? Bubba73 (talk), 20:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

People, come on! This is a hoax. It never happened. Look, I want to believe, but this film is a hoax. Aliens could be real, but that film is known as a hoax. The creator said so.

[[5]]

Neither an "alien" nor an "autopsy"[edit]

A point of order, folks....

I acknowlede that the name "alien autopsy" is commonly attached to this ridiculous affair, and that "Alien autopsy" might be the correct name for the article. That said, and without wishing to sound pedantic, I think that the terms alien and autopsy are best avoided in the body of the article as far as possible, in the interest of strictly encyclopedic prose. Remember please, that autopsy is defined as the post-mortem examination of a human being, and that some of us human beings are, in fact, aliens, though not actually extraterrestrial. Even if the footage really had turned out to depict the post-mortem examination of an extraterrestrial, it still wouldn't show an alien autopsy. I've used examination (rather than autopsy), extraterrestrial being and dummy. I always figured that the thing was just a bloody meat puppet.... --TheMadBaron 19:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The term "autopsy" is not restricted to postmortem examinations of human beings; it is also applied to animal PMs. In addition, if you look at the etymology of the word, you will see it comes from the Greek autos + optos ("self-seen"), having nothing to do with whether the subject is human or not. Also note that "alien necropsy" is no more accurate than "alien autopsy," as "necropsy" is simply a synonym of "autopsy" (although "necropsy" is more often applied to animal PMs). As for "alien," the word does not only have a legal definition; it is also commonly understood (and formally defined) as meaning "extraterrestrial." (For a list of definitions of these terms, I suggest using the form "define: subject" on Google.) Therefore, as it is misinformation, I am removing the note on the use of "alien autopsy" in the introduction to the article. Flamingpies (talk) 17:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Scope[edit]

The intro says this article is about the phenominon of alien autopsy in general...if that's true, there seriously needs to be some coverage of some different topics. --InShaneee 15:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Hoax?[edit]

Someone calling themselves Santilli editted this entry [6] and this was reverted but that version does come closer to a NPOV. As far as (the real) Santilli has said it isn't a hoax it is a reconstruction. Personally I think he is trying to have his cake and eat it (as well as spin this whole saga out for a bit longer) but if we are going to reflect both sides of the arguement the best we can say is that a lot of people consider this a hoax but Santilli claims there are tiny parts of the original footage mixed in with a "reconstruction" of it that he created. Unless someone can poke holes in his version of the story that is the best we can say. (Emperor 21:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC))

Sources[edit]

This whole thing is lacking in sources and those that are here are of the more hardocre Skeptical variety and there does need to be some balance. There is a Fortean Times article online which gives more details [7] whihc has some interesting reactions from Mantle and the impact on BUFORA and British Ufology (my understanding was BUFORA didn't necessarily believe it but gave it a platform). I think the FT article was accompanied by a piece from Jenny Randles (who ran it at the time) about the feelings in the community at the time and I'll try and dig it out. Anyone got any more references? (Emperor 19:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC))

I think that a good starting place would be to find a WP:RS source that can verify what Santilli said about having 'restored' the film. I can personally vouche that its mostly accurate (Which is why I tagged it, rather than deleted it), but I don't have a source to WP:V it. perfectblue 19:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
The source pretty much is the Eaommon Investigates Sky One show (and reports on it and possibly follow up interviews - although I don't know of many that expand on his carefully worded statements). If that is reliable enough I can see if I can get some quotes. (Emperor 20:06, 23 October 2006 (UTC))
Not every article needs "some balance" -- some things are too bogus to bother. Does an article about John Dillinger need to be balanced with sources that think he was framed for every crime? Does an article on Santa Claus need some balance from sources that say he exists? Extraterrestrials can visit the earth regardless of the authenticy of any of those alien autopsy films. Doczilla 08:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, obviously the film is a hoax which also removes any basis for claims about alien autopsies. However, just as obviously you have not understood what NPOV means. Str1977 (talk) 08:41, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Russian extraterrestrial[edit]

I saw a television documentary about an extraterrestrial spacecraft crash in Russia and subsequent amateur post-mortem of extraterrestrials. I don't remember the title though. This event should be covered in this article too.
Sleigh 19:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

You saw a film about Alyoshenka, which isn't a fake, yet not an alien. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Efenstor (talkcontribs) 09:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Biography Project banner[edit]

The Biography WikiProject banner ended up on this talk page. I have removed it, as it shouldn't be here: the article this page is attatched to isn't a biography and doesn't discuss a person.  — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!) 20:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Trivia[edit]

In the movie "Ghost World," a man approaches Enid and Rebecca to give them a flyer advertising a for a gig in which his band, "Alien Autopsy" will be playing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.31.192 (talk) 06:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Suggested addition[edit]

The following addition to the article Alien Autopsy is suggested to make the article more broad in scope, and to add information for those of us interested in the Roswell Incident:

Several researchers have reported that an autopsy was conducted in the Roswell Army Air Base Hospital (now the site of the New Mexico Rehabilitation Center) on an alien recovered from the 1947 Roswell UFO Crash, although as usual, many conflicting claims and counter-claims surround the reports. In one popular story, Nurse Self drew sketches of the alien she had helped autopsy for Glenn Dennis when they met for coffee the next day in the Officer’s Club (now the site of the Eastern New Mexico University-Roswell Student Union Building). A mock-up of the autopsy scene, used in the 1994 Showtime movie, "Roswell," is a popular display in the UFO Museum in Roswell, NM. (Reference: Lynn Michelsohn. "Roswell, Your Travel Guide to the UFO Capital of the World!" Cleanan Press, 2008. ISBN# 978-0-9771614-7-8)

Comments?

Professor73Q (talk) 18:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't sound very encyclopedic to me. For starters it blandly states "...on an alien recovered..." as though it were a fact. Surely its an "alleged" alien and "Several researchers" sound like weasel words to me. Jschnur (talk) 01:13, 8 July 2009 (UTC) Is "autopsy" a verb? Whats wrong with "perform an autopsy" Jschnur (talk) 03:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Dispute tag[edit]

I added the dispute tag because the lead is making remarkable statements as though they were fact, without a shred of evidence/sourcing. Who says an alien autopsy "is" a medical examination and dissection "of the dead body" of an "extraterrestrial"? We don't even say this is claimed by someone, or even who the claimants are. At present Wikipedia itself is baldly stating that "An alien autopsy is a medical examination and dissection of the dead body of an extraterrestrial being ". Some serious sourcing is needed or it needs to be deleted. Moriori (talk) 04:29, 12 August 2011 (UTC)