The UFO Iconoclast(s)

Sunday, November 10, 2013


Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc. [Permission needed to publish any part of this item. Otherwise copyright infringement will be pursued]


Tangible proof that a crash near Roswell, NM was of extraterrestrial origin has been long sought and earnestly pursued by a core team of crash investigators. Mounting evidence now indicates that such material evidence may have finally emerged in the form of an astounding scene imaged on 1947 Kodachromes of an alien corpse from the crash. A famous-in-his-field geologist who possessed the slides adds considerable weight to their authenticity.


My research associates, pioneer Roswell investigators and authors Tom Carey and Don Schmitt, began a dialog with a brother and his sister, a onetime estate-cleaner. Some time ago, during the course of disposing property that was left in a home that she was clearing out, she happened upon a chest that held dozens of old slides. As it was considered waste from a vacated property, she took the chest home. These slides acted as windows into the lives of a prosperous and well-connected couple in the 1940s.

Many years after she had retrieved the chest and examined the many slides it held, she made a second discovery. She found two more slides that had been stored within the chest. They had been placed in an envelope that was taped in a hidden part of the chest’s upper lid. They had been purposely separated from the other slides.

The scenes depicted on these slides were very different than the other slides in the chest. These slides showed a strange, small corpse. Why did this couple from so long ago even possess such disturbing images?

This was no prop or model, nor a sick joke. It showed a corporeal being. It was a humanoid, most certainly not of earth and it was dead. Feeling uncomfortable even possessing them, she gave the slides to someone that she trusted and who could hold them for safekeeping. That person was her brother, who later contacted Tom and Don.


Hilda Ray, Bernerd's wife

The slides were traced to Hilda Blair Ray and Bernerd A. Ray, a childless married couple. Hilda was a prominent attorney. It was first thought by some researchers of the case that a client may have asked Hilda to retain the slides. And though she certainly (and thankfully) kept the slides after her husband’s death, it was my feeling, after being briefed on the case, that it was Hilda’s husband Bernerd that should be examined more closely.

I then conducted a very thorough investigation of Ray. Early indications were that he was an engineer or scientist of some sort. I began consulting technical literature databases. This required using variations on his name (such as “Bernerd Ray” “Bernerd A. Ray,” “Bernerd Arthur Ray,” “B.A. Ray” and “Ray, BA”) to find out more about him.

This deep background search on Ray offered up something that was staggering:

In the 1940’s, Bernerd Ray was an Oil Exploration Geologist who had worked the Permian Basin, which includes the Roswell region where the crash had occurred.


And in 1946, the year before the crash, Bernerd Ray was also President of the West Texas Geological Society (which covered the New Mexico region) Because New Mexico had not yet formed its own geological society, the West Texas society (in Midland, TX) led research and organized expeditions into the State, with a special interest in Eastern New Mexico.

Interestingly, after 1947, the year of the Roswell crash, Ray became a virtual “ghost” in his field. He was no longer visible within the literature and he was no longer active as an officer in professional societies (though I did find a brief mention of him teaching courses at a small college in the 1950s.)


And just as Ray left the slides “unclaimed,” I found that Bernerd also left cash after he died, which is held to this day by the State of Texas in its Unclaimed Properties office.

I learned that Bernerd had graduated from the University of Oklahoma with a degree in Geology and from the University of Minnesota with a graduate degree in Business. He was published in his field in the 1940s, including in the American Association of Petroleum Geologists AAPG Bulletin.

Ray was an executive with Tidewater Associated Company (which later merged with Texaco) where he helped to lead exploration geology in Texas and in New Mexico.

Bernerd provided overviews of oil and gas exploration and survey activity in New Mexico and West Texas. He analyzed and reported on wildcatting activity, drilling and production activities.

And two important things were learned when inquired of an employee at the West Texas Geological Society familiar with the long history of the Society:

1) Geologists of that day were also very good photographers and they carried cameras. They used high-quality equipment and film like Kodak and Kodachrome.  They photographed such things as well boring core, sediment layers, and geological formations.

2) They traveled in teams on these expeditions. Such exploration geologists did not travel out in the desert alone.  There are others out there that may be able to corroborate Ray’s fateful expedition. Anyone who may know more about Ray (or his professional colleagues) are encouraged to contact a Roswell investigative team member- Tom Carey, Don Schmitt, David Rudiak or this author with any relevant information.

Given this background on the slides we are now confronted with an inescapable truth:

A prominent geologist who explored the New Mexico desert in the 1940s is directly associated with two 1947 Kodachromes depicting a humanoid corpse as found at Roswell.  

Bernerd Ray was neither hoaxing nor being hoaxed.



Previous concerns expressed in my September piece “Authentic Alien Images from Roswell Finally Found?” that the slides would remain in private purview are now allayed.

The owner of the film recognizes the slides’ significance as a visual document of history. They are planned, in time, to be presented to the public.



  • Tony:

    Thanks for all of your efforts on behalf of the possible vetting of these two slides.

    Some questions: (1)Can you provide an educated guess on the time frame for any public viewing (I assume that the authenticity process is well along);and(2) What would be your preference for the best possible forum for the presentation of these slides to the public.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, November 10, 2013  

  • The owner of the film recognizes the slides’ significance as a visual document of history.

    Loose translation: The owner of the film recognizes the opportunity to make a tidy profit from the gullibility of people whose will to believe overwhelms their critical faculties.

    Meanwhile, the question has to be asked (at least by any reasonable person): if you already know beyond any doubt that the slides show an alien, why wait another second to release all the information of such a momentous find? Surely the public, after over six decades of government lies, deserves the indisputable proof immediately? Why, think of the poor people who will pass away between now and the Big Event, who will die without seeing the Truth at last?

    The reason, of course, is that Mr. Bragalia and his reprehensible colleagues need time to gin up as much interest as they can, so that they can all cash in to the maximum possible amount. It's a tried and true method of paranormal hucksters.

    And thus does this sad farce wind its way towards its inevitable conclusion.


    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, November 10, 2013  

  • Thanks again for sharing this information, Tony, I for one appreciate your hard work and diligence in attempting to establish the provenance and authenticity of these images.

    I look forward to the public release and hope that this will include not just the images themselves but other information relevant to their provenance. Such as; additional slides depicting the family with high level people, analysis from Kodak, details regarding the family estate and obituaries.

    Hopefully this will aid independent authentication efforts and put to bed the concerns raised by individuals such as Mr Kimball.

    By Blogger Lee Nicholson, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • Dominick and Lee-

    Thanks much for the comments and encouragement.

    Lee, the background confirmations and details you mention we have. Dominick- I'd not rather make a guess as I am far-removed from those kinds of decisions. I will leave it to the owner and others on the team closer to all of this than me to tell the story in the completeness it deserves. I was merely highlighting my research on the case.


    By Blogger Anthony Bragalia, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • Unfortunately,the public release of two slides will not solve the issue of the Roswell merry-go-round. It will refuel, for a finite period of time,the same pointless arguments, the same doubts, the same exaggerations, the same minutia, the same weak hoopla. To think otherwise is incredibly naive. Then it will fade away once it can no longer push the sales of cornflakes or some such thing..a little sobriety goes a long way in our prosaic world.It is as if a detective says there's no crime if there are no bodies.Someone says they have a picture of bodies but no bodies. No one in officialdom will bother to comment.A few who drink at the same bar will get stewed.
    What else is new?
    The world keeps turning around.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • I echo Paul Kimball's and Bruce's comments. There is nothing new here, nothing at all, just 'distant memory' stuff from a deceased geologist who may or may not have been in the area in the given time period.

    Two questions:

    1. Why on earth should we assume the slides relate to Roswell at all?

    2. Why should we assume they were even taken in summer '47?

    Tony, you are just putting out 'pie in the sky' ideas as though they were fact. I predict they will turn out as worthless as all the other alleged Roswell hard evidence (what happened to these?)

    And now let us return to more interesting and fruitful matters - such as the JFK 50th anniversary. Ha!

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • CDA
    To think that the ambivalent has import is a bridge too far for me,outside of the subjectivity that can make anything either extraordinary or ordinary as if they were preordained to be so, to remain
    material for dreams or nightmares.
    I was thinking about your comment regarding any real revisionism that could take place if any theory of conspiracy were taken by consensus to be true, and having lived long enough in any practical matter, it would change nothing in any significant way as to whether one had a good breakfast or not, whether the boss derided or praised someone, except for the province of the mind that would be so naive to consider that such a presumed event would turn the tide for our sorry little plight made less burdensome by small pleasures and family.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • I understand skepticism--we all should be extremely skeptical about any UFO information, especially alleged photos--but I don't get the extreme negativity exhibited here by several commentators BEFORE THE INFORMATION APPEARS! Isn't it premature to assert that you already know that the alleged information is "worthless" and comes from "paranormal hucksters" who are only out to "gin up" interest for profit? You may well be right after the fact but can't we at least wait for those facts to appear before we pass judgment?

    By Blogger Dominick, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • I have never sought nor taken any monies for any of my efforts, Paul. You do not even know me or a thing about my motivations. Because if you did you would know that I believe my only obligations are to truth and history. My research has only cost me, not profited me. For most all of us it is an avocation, not our vocation. It is often thankless work and you prove it. Funny too Paul, only your Uncle Stan Friedman seems to be making any money off the subject, and then only marginally.

    And you should should join Lance Moody in the name-calling. Saying we are 'reprehensible' sounds like Lance, who has recently taken to shouting that I am an "idiot" when he cannot offer an real objections to what I have researched. Go play in the playground with the likes Lance until you have something intelligent to say.

    CDA- You must be kidding. Perhaps it is because you are not from this country that you have not heard the adage "if it walks like a duck..."

    By Blogger Anthony Bragalia, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • Saying we are 'reprehensible' sounds like Lance, who has recently taken to shouting that I am an "idiot"

    I think your biggest problem (so many from which too choose) is that you have absolutely no sense of humour. I used the term "reprehensible" because that's what you called me a little while ago in a comment here. I thought the irony would be amusing. However, the fact that you missed the reference, and clearly missed the irony, is even more hilarious, so thank you for that.

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • For what it's worth, I was able to duplicate some of Tony's finding. Clearly the Ray's were real people, Bernerd Ray was indeed a Petroleum Geologist and may well have been in the New Mexico desert in 1947.

    So it would seem that the story presented to the 'Dream team' has legs. If we accept that the slides exist, and there is no reason not to, and they are confirmed to be from the mid 40s era, then the real question becomes; what exactly do they depict?

    By Blogger Lee Nicholson, at Monday, November 11, 2013  

  • YO TONY!!! -

    ...while I ain't gonna challenge the fine work you have done from your crib in Florida on this great Roswell scam, I gotta wonder, dude: WHY aintcha' suggesting we send our bitchin' new Roswell slide clues to the only Dream Team dude that has an actual history and demonstrated public record, Kevin Randle????

    .....I mean SERIOUSLY Dude?????

    By Blogger Chuck Finley, at Tuesday, November 12, 2013  

  • So a petroleum geologist "may well have been in the New Mexico desert in 1947".

    Big deal!

    When exactly was he in this desert and what part of the desert was he in? And is there anything to indicate that the said slides were taken at that time and place, and not somewhere else a few days later or earlier?

    Even if they are confirmed to be from the mid-1940s era it would be totally useless as evidence that ETs crashed to earth near Roswell, based on the information available.

    But of course the most important question is whether, even if the eaxct date and place could be determined (which it cannot), the slides depict anything that genuinely cannot be identified as a terrestrial creature.

    Where are the field notes/diaries of this geologist? Do any exist? Who else was with him? You would hardly expect such an important discovery as this to be undocumented.

    We are told that the story presented to the 'Dream Team' "has legs". Some legs!

    I predict that nothing useful to science will come of this. Nothing whatever.

    But don't let that deter people like AJB from trying to square the circle.

    By Blogger cda, at Tuesday, November 12, 2013  

  • Those of us who have been around this block of naive realism more than once immediately recognize that these images are circumstantial to the extent that it will only burden this dead heat of circular debate further with more detritus that has exceeded the scope of anyone to analyse it with a any form of inclusive and conclusive results.
    That being recognized as a common sense premonition of where this is heading, one must ask what the anticipation is...from those who have promulgated it.
    At best it keeps the topic in a state of suspension and ambiguity to the point one must ask if it is to keep the fire smoldering with the addition of more kindling, and beyond this?
    I have the suspicion that the progenitors think some sort of bizarre floodgate will open, the Red Sea will part..wherein this is another cycle within a cycle of the same scenario with slight variegation.
    Among quite a few individuals, this search of reliquaries seems quite cult like as an invocation.. the drawing of a pentagram on the floor, burning the right incense and intoning the right language, and an alien will pop forth.
    The naive realism of this is striking as nearly everything around their circling of the wagons indicates a complete absence of order to the phenomenon that they are attempting to impose as a sort of transcendent beatification and noble act which in their minds makes them all the Green Knight. Ask yourself, what would dissuade them? Having spent decades reading metaphysical texts, it is interesting to transpose an alchemical quest to this 21st century context full of Kodachrome slides, bending metals,
    visionary witnesses..fitted like a jigsaw puzzle into a spiritual form of idealism turning the base metals of circumstantial evidence into proverbial gold.
    I am reminded of the Tarot card, the Holy Fool..who persists upon insisting the existence of an invisible world. In this case we have the whole process inverted in the opposing direction, to create the material existence of that which remains patently invisible as a truly metaphysical science of hermetics.
    And so they scour the countryside until perhaps only Percival is left as the last man standing.
    A very odd corollary of human nature in the material world of what elixirs we seek and for what purpose? None that are as pragmatic as they say such reasons are.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, November 12, 2013  

  • Let me make some quick off the cuff observations.

    The slides "could be" an interesting find. Notice I said "could be" and "interesting."

    There are many questions that should be answered BEFORE photographs or scans from the slides are published or put into public domain.

    1) Can we verify that the two slides did in fact come from 1947 era film? Meaning don't take the date on the paper collar of the slide as the truth. Take one to Kodak and have them verify it if possible. IF that can't be verified, Strike ONE

    2) Out of the entire group of slides can we verify where the slides in question were as part of a roll of film? Perhaps they were part of the rest of the slides, perhaps not.

    3) Can we verify when the film was actually developed? Just because it may have a 1947 date somewhere on it doesn't mean it was actually taken in 1947.

    4) Can we verify where the slides of the corpse were taken? In other words, could be anywhere there is desert. Could vegetation in the picture give us a clue? Was there anything in the background of the picture that would give us a clue?

    5) Can we verify who actually took the pictures? We might get a clue by comparing the two slides against the rest of the slides that were found.

    6) The guy was an oil geologist in New Mexico. Did he know or run into Silas Newton/GeBauer. Could there have been interaction there?

    Even if the film is verified as 1947, verify that it was developed in 1947, verify that it was part of other slides that were in the container, if all we have are two slides which show a small corpse laying on the desert floor, with no back ground terrain, these are pretty much worthless and unverifiable. It will only tell us that at some point between 1947 and say 1950 that an individual came across a small corpse in the desert, say New Mexico, Colorado, or any other location and shot at least two pictures of it.

    Had the geologist found a crash site I would find it difficult to believe that the Geologist didn't shoot some pictures of the crash site or what was near the corpse.

    Obviously the military didn't see him, strip the film out of the camera like they can be famous for doing, or those pictures wouldn't have turned out. Again why would he only shoot 2 photographs?

    I do disagree with those that think if somebody thought this was real, they should publicly toss the images out.

    We have had too much of that over the years. What needs to happen is a lot of research/verification and leg work BEFORE stuff like this is tossed out and BEFORE the person owning the photograph and or anybody else races out to Coast to Coast AM and blab this all over. Too much of that, which in some cases have turned out to be bogus and misleading information.

    By Blogger Unknown, at Tuesday, November 12, 2013  

  • Hi Anonymous-

    Thank you for your excellent questions:

    Former Kodak folk would necessarily be involved in any such testing.

    There are dozens of slides, so not all from the same roll but all from the same time frame.

    Actual date of development near impossible to ascertain.

    No clues to location from 'vegetation.'

    Pics were most likely taken by Bernerd because: -He most probably was issued Kodak/Kodakchrome when at Tidewater/Texaco and -he was in NM in the '40s in the desert and -the slides were found among his wife's effects, and -they were found amongst other late 40s' slides w/ his wife and he picture. All of this combined, it is probable that he took them.

    Perhaps Newton, a geologist at the time too, heard about the Ray find and convoluted and confabulated the Aztec tale, but I have seen no evidence to support this whatsoever.


    By Blogger Anthony Bragalia, at Tuesday, November 12, 2013  

  • When Bragalia, Schmitt and Carey in "Nature" or Science" to have provided the first Alien Beeings scientific evidence?
    A question of time, I guess...

    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Tuesday, November 12, 2013  

  • 60 minutes has showed some interest ...

    By Blogger Yvan D., at Tuesday, November 12, 2013  

  • Mr. Bragalia, perhaps you addressed this in a previous communication, so please forgive me if this is redundant, but I notice the current post doesn't explicitly state that you or your colleagues have seen the two slides.

    Can you confirm who exactly among you has seen the slides? Not prints or pictures of the slides, but the slides themselves?

    Thank you.

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Wednesday, November 13, 2013  

  • Hi Terry-

    As mentioned in my September piece on this, I am unable to confirm who or who has not seen the slides, where they are stored, and by whom. Those are details that understandably will have to wait for release. Until that happens, security and confidentiality will remain key.


    By Blogger Anthony Bragalia, at Wednesday, November 13, 2013  

  • Terry:

    You may interpret the word 'unable' as 'unwilling' if you wish. It is a convenient 'get out'. Notice that AJB is even 'unable' to say whether he himself has seen the said slides.

    But, like me, I doubt that you unduly excited at the prospect of some future revelation.

    By Blogger cda, at Wednesday, November 13, 2013  

  • ...I think I may have located the home blog source for the elusive and undocumented genius self-nsmed "AJB":

    The technology from Nazi Germany was steered to the Military Industrial Complex, with names like Howard Hughes, General Dynamics accomplishing the hard asset end, to General Electric and specifically Bell Labs being afforded the soft assets of the real foundations..."

    ...sound familiar?:

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Wednesday, November 13, 2013  

  • KP...

    We know who "Lame Cherry" is and I wouldn't put much stock in the ramblings at his/her blog.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, November 13, 2013  

  • Tony Bragalia is one of the researchers. He’s a Sarasota hometown guy and we’ve talked on a number of occasions. He’s an executive talent scout and he knows how and where to root out information. He’s been on the Roswell trail for years and financed his research out of his own pocket. He says he’s met the owner of the photos and seen the pix personally. “They’re both in full color and extremely close,” he says.

    There you have it. Bragalia has seen the pics and has met the owner. He does not need to hide behind "I can't tell you that" since he is on the public record. Strange that he is perfectly willing to talk about it to Billy Cox but refuses to answer this simple question here.

    By Blogger Tim Printy, at Wednesday, November 13, 2013  

  • It's interesting to me that many seem to regard the primary point of interest with the slides being whether they were taken in 47 and relate definitely to the Roswell Incident. Surely the primary question to ask about the slides is: do they convincingly depict a definitively non-terrestrial creature, in a manner which would be at least extremely difficult to fake for the rough period in question? IF the answer to that question is yes, then the slides would have to be hugely interesting,regardless of any connection to Roswell. For me at any rate, the significance of the slides will hinge on whether they represent a quantum leap in persuasiveness from the mountains of putative alien images already available to the perusal of a jaded public. The circumstantial evidence is certainly interesting, but it will only go so far if the images themselves don't wow.

    By Blogger Tristan Eldritch, at Thursday, November 14, 2013  

  • Would Tony be willing to answer Printy's comment above?

    It's easy to present "findings" to Cox and have questions moderated to the hilt, but something else to have questions asked and answered here.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Thursday, November 14, 2013  

  • As usual, I remain fascinated by the marketing schemes of people, and for people, who fail to comprehend that anything remotely resembling a primate cannot also be alien.

    By Blogger The Puppetburglar, at Monday, November 18, 2013  

  • I think Tim's question should be answered, but perhaps Chuck's question is even more relevant. Perhaps that's why it's been ignored:

    "WHY aintcha' suggesting we send our bitchin' new Roswell slide clues to the only Dream Team dude that has an actual history and demonstrated public record, Kevin Randle????
    .....I mean SERIOUSLY Dude?????"

    Indeed. Not to mention that it's great you found some photos from someone who found a trunk presumably connected to an actual geologist. However, connecting any such photos to Roswell Alien Evidence, no matter how you look at it, is harder than you breezily proclaim. Even an ossified photo of a corpse of something won't, ipso facto, lead to your conclusions, not by a long shot. There's no historical trail to anything, even if the photos look muy bueno. I sure hope you and Mr. Schmitt and the remaining 'Team members will clarify these minor issues. I'm afraid the Roswell-Jaded outnumber the 'Team and 'Team Fans by a large margin.

    By Blogger Sapient, at Wednesday, November 20, 2013  

  • Why not?

    By Blogger Red Eye View, at Wednesday, November 20, 2013  

  • Sapient-

    You are seriously misinformed. Kevin Randle has been brought up to speed on this story and I continue to dialog with Kevin regularly on this and other Roswell investigation matters.
    Though it now a more informal relationship- we remain civil and cordial and I respect his work greatly.

    Kurt Peters-

    I am elusive, undocumented and self-named? You have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about, which is why I generally ignore your comments. Simply look me up on LinkedIn! Many have met me, emailed me and talked to me on the phone. Do not try to make me out as some sort of "mystery man." Your obsession with trying to sound like an "insider" about me, DS, TC and others is freakishly weird.

    And I am aware that two 1947 slides of a dead alien do not equate to tissue slides/samples or the actual cadaver itself. But given the confirmed authenticity and provenance of the slides- it is as close as we will ever come that kind of physical evidence.

    Finally, it is enough to know that scientists, some team members and several outside the team, have seen and evaluated the slides. I am simply not going to name those names. It is not relevant to the story as next year you will all see the slides when revealed publicly.


    By Blogger Anthony Bragalia, at Wednesday, November 20, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home