Six ETs Photographed On
Alabama Garage Roof?
George A. Filer
Director - Mutual UFO Network Eastern
MUFON Skywatch Investigations
Filer's Files #3 1-16-01

From Barry Taylor
Subject: 'Alien Choir'
Until now, I was willing to accept that you and your Science team had made an honest mistake in the image analysis, and once it was pointed out to you that the image is a natural occurrence, you would admit your mistaken identity and learn from the exercise.
But, after reading your latest follow-up at..... It appears that you are "digging yourself deeper into a hole". It is one thing to admit you are wrong and explain WHERE you went wrong. It is another much more serious matter when you deliberately manipulate the evidence in an attempt to 'MOULD' it into your already committed conclusions.
You 'jumped to the Alien Choir conclusion' BEFORE serious analysis on the image was done and the results tried and tested. Your Science advisers made a mistake. It is clearly evident in the close image analysis carried out by other independent Researchers, [including myself] of which you have taken absolutely NO notice of, that a bright light reflecting off the white house wall silhouetted by the two trees between the house and garage roof is actually what is causing the lighting effect you are claiming to be "Six Aliens" or the "Alien Choir".
You either truly believe in your statements on the analysis and unwilling to listen to a more rational explanation of the image analysis. Or, you are unwilling to 'back up' and admit you have made an error of judgment in your image analysis, and now intend to manipulate the evidence so as to fit this mould you have already created.
There are many Researchers out there willing and capable of assisting you with this case. It would be advisable to listen to them, and test their theories against the evidence. Not all will be right. But some will be. Just because their findings do not match yours, does not mean they are wrong and you are right. Test the evidence presented, if it stands up to scrutiny, than use it to alter your opinion of the image more toward the truth, not FURTHER from the truth through stubbornness combined with ignorance.
Power Wires:
Your statement on the pixel scatter around the power lines is ridiculous. You are saying you have a camera that can photograph the invisible etherical energy of an alternating electric current surrounding power lines at a distance of approx. 30feet. Next you will be saying this camera can photograph the Human Aura.
Digital cameras do not "see" more than a film camera, they have a much lower resolution, therefore less capable of capturing detail, especially maintaining detail during enlargement and file compression. What you see around the power lines, pole, trees and buildings [infact every detail in the enlargement of the image] is normal digital 'pixel scatter', not what you are claiming.
Night Comparison Image:
Who are you trying to kid with this comparison image? The Mercury Vapour street light is a similar brightness to the porch light. The distance between the street light and porch light when scale and perspective are taken into account, makes this image taken much further up the road from where the original night photo of the "Alien Choir" was taken. The lack of light from this street light indicates manipulation in an image programme to "darken" the image so as to fit your argument.
Basically, every statement in your follow-up is carefully selected so as to back-up your original statement. And anything that may be directed toward a natural or suggested solution other than what you claim, is carefully avoided. You even conclude again that this is a genuine photo of Aliens.
You state that the image warrants further investigation. Well it is up to you to listen and learn from whoever is willing to assist you with it. Maybe you are just looking for others that blindly agree with your conclusions. As far as I [and many others] are concerned, the case has been solved. More important than the image, is how you continue to handle this issue.
Barry Taylor.
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:36:28 EST
Subject: Re: Hello
Hi Barry,
There is an old American / English saying from the 1800's which applies to your situation as well as mine: You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink! You can send questions, but I am preparing a brief photo analysis for the web site. Marilyn
From: Barry Taylor
I have just read your update on the so called "Alien Choir" image. As a follow-up to your message below, after reading your latest response to enquiries, I say the following................
"Don't try and lead a horse to a sand box, tell him it is water, than expect him to drink it"!!!!



At, where AAER makes its defense of the alien choir/group image, a Dr. John Geyde states: ""The 'alien choir' photographs should be judged primarily by whether they are acceptable to "experiencers" (abductees) as representing what they see when they "experience." Only if the photos are acceptable, is it worth spending time discussing how they are produced."  What in the world does that mean?? It sounds like a complete abandonment of all rational scrutiny and inquiry. Sheer double-speak. It certainly isn't logic in action. If the picture "feels right" to experiencers then its acceptable? Since when did experiencers become the litmus for examining UFO/Alien photo evidence? This is not reliable, rational or dutiful scrutiny. We in the UFO community should be first-foot-forward before all others to examine evidence with a highly critical eye, otherwise we send UFOlogy backward some 20 years to the days before rationalists like Stanton Friedman, Keyhoe and others moved UFOlogy into the realm of legitimate scientific inquiry and out of the realm of pop-fringe counterculture "belief" systems held by what the public generally regarded as "kooks." The question is not whether or not aliens can/have/do/did congregate on the roof top of a garage in Alabama! The question is, whether or not the photo is being interpreted correctly, has been tampered with in some way or is a deliberate hoax. It doesn't impugn the "anonymous" photographer to be subjected to critical analysis! The day UFOlogy stops investigating all possibilities is the day UFOlogy becomes a certified religion unto itself, apart from the taint to scientific inquiry.
From Matt Taylor
Jeff, I noticed on your site an article pointing to a defense of the 'alien choir' photo ( I haven't looked through the whole page, but I couldn't help but notice a point (point 10) referring to electrical wires, and the 'energy field' that the digital camera has managed to capture. This effect is no energy field, rather it is an artifact of the JPEG compression scheme commonly used to compress digital images. The scheme is designed to represent images of real-world scenes, which tend not to contain many sudden changes in colour . The effect seen on the image is a byproduct of the JPEG algorithm's attempt to represent the electricity wire, and nothing more. I'm not sure which illustrious doctor was supposed to have made that particular point, but their PhD was certainly not in image processing.
Matt Taylor

You are entirely correct.
The AAER site states (along with the picture above):

"" Question: Why do the close-ups of the electric wires have wavy lines?
Answer:  Because the digital camera "sees" more than a 35 mm film camera, it is able to record the energy field around the electric wires and other objects as well. Note waves of energy which look like alternating bumps on the top and bottom side of the wires. ""

There is absolutely no reason to conclude that these electric lines are giving off any special energy to which the digital camera is sensitive! If such is so, then the following elements of the daylight photo need equally bold explanations regarding special energies!!,
I'm a photographer and I have looked at the alien chorus photo and the control photo and I find a possible explanation that is neither computer manipulation or aliens. If you will notice that in the control photo there is a house some distance from the foreground (possibly) garage. In between there are some trees. The aliens are supposed to be standing on the garage roof which overlaps the house side wall in the background. If you notice there are two vertical black areas in the alien group. Those are out of focus trees and the hanging branches make the black areas that form shoulders or areas around the alien heads. A bright secuity light maybe illuminating the house wall and with the light blurred and out of focus, with intervening trees, it appears that green body shapes are on the roof of the garage. The control photo is somewhat to the left of the night photos perspective. If this was shot on film maybe a filter was used to make the light more green. If it was digital maybe the white balance was wrong. The cut and paste artifacts may be from the conversion of the .jpeg to .bmp. I have seen lines and artifacts build up around objects in .jpegs that I have made.
Bruce Conner

Bruce Conner's suggestion prompted me to make a composite, and sure enough, there is strong evidence that his idea is correct; it remains that we have no explanation of the odd light sources in the sky, a no verification of a security light on that side of the house, or why the pixelization is so intensely distorted near each of the anomalous objects (which I contend is extreme compared to normal jpeg compression artifacts), but it appears Mr. Conner has indeed seen something heretofore overlooked! Several other eagle-eyed folks out there also submitted this as the explanation for the "choir",,, thanks to all of them! We need your analysis! - Webmaster

Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001
To the RENSE.COM website. I have been a reader of your website for about 4 years now and I have to advise you that the photo in the story you ran today...
Six ETs Photographed On Alabama Garage Roof?
...unfortunately appears to be a fraud. Checking these photos out you see bright green glowing figures at night on top of some sort of structure. Now I realize that you cannot go back in time to this point to verify it, but using very simple tools it took me 2 and half minutes to see this photo as a fraud. If you don't have a $500 graphics program then I will explain how you can see this with only your basic Windows or Winnt OS as I have done to verify this. First if you go to the peoples website they block you from saving a copy of the photo and a message pops up saying that the photo is copyrighted. Yeah right! If you go to your Temporary Internet Files in your Windows or WINNT directory ( for PC Users ) you will find a file called...pn007.jpg
I opened this file in Internet Explorer and saved this file off as a BMP file by right clicking on it and choosing SAVE PICTURE AS. Once saved, I open Microsoft Windows PAINT program ( START -> PROGRAMS -> ACCESSORIES -> PAINT ) then open the BMP file you saved. Go to EDIT at the top and choose SELECT ALL then goto IMAGE and INVERT COLORS and you will get this...
Now if you goto VIEW then ZOOM and choose LARGE SIZE you will get this...
Now what you are looking at is a negative of the websites picture blown up. If you look carefully at the "ETs" you will see a nice square pixelation around them that even cuts off part of their glow. What this means is that the "photographer" digitally pasted another picture on top of this one. Now that just took me 2 and half minutes with no special graphics software or filters. I would imagine that someone with these tools can point out more, but I really don't see the need since this photo is what it is...a fraud!
Thank you.

After being alerted by Richard, our own analysis reveals precisely the same cut-n-paste evidence. JPEG compression leaves its own tell-tale marks as we all know, but rarely such perfectly squared off edges of distortion.
Comparison of pixelization in objects in photo

More Comments:
The Sentinel Files "Always Watching the Skies" The Sentinel Files Home Page
To whom it may concern:
My name is Lynn Taylor. I know the photographer personally, and I know for a fact that this individual did not hoax this photo. I cannot say with certainty that the image portrays a group of aliens, but I can vouch for the photographer's sincereness and honesty.
It is people like you and this self-appointed expert, Richard (whoever he is), who discourage the public from divulging their evidence and experiences by way of your inept, arrogant, "shoot from the hip" approach. What is more, you commit you dastardly deeds in the name of "protecting the public from charlatans."
Bottom line: I now know, personally, that you don't know what you're talking about. Therefore, I must reassess everything about Rense and associates, your motives, competence, sincerity, and honesty, and the overall content of your Site. You people are not researchers, you exist as a parasitic entity, living off of the work of others, You thrive by creating an impression of authority on the subject of UFOs and aliens by casting slanderous and ill-founded aspersions upon others.
Thank you for showing your true colors.
-- Lynn Taylor
You are welcome to bad mouth us all you want... but we present what we feel people will be interested in. We presented the piece as authentic... then we presented the viewpoint of someone who suspects tampering and we replicated their results. If the photographer in question would make an original image available for analysis, and not a compressed Jpeg, we'd have more to work with. We're only interested in what is real... and intense scrutiny MUST be applied to EVERY UFO/alien photographic claim. Otherwise, we all just might as well admit that what we have here is a religion, and belief, and not a scientific inquiry.
Are you ready to cross that line? I'm not. Just because YOU personally know the photographer doesn't tell ME a damn thing. Who are YOU?
- James Neff
And it's people like you, James, who give human beings a bad name. Further, I intend to make everyone in ufology aware of the damage you've done to this innocent person, and to the integrety of AAER. You will be avoided like the plague. That's a promise!
- Lynn Taylor
The Only people you will have any effect on are those who blindly believe every UFO and alien story and photo that comes down the pike, and people who don't want rational inquiry and examination of evidence... and such people are quacks and are not legitimate Ufologists. You've lost ALL PERSPECTIVE when you object to scrutiny and examination! How embarassing for you. If my MOTHER said she photographed an alien being, I'd test it for fraud/tampering and examine it in the light of reason, open to alternative explanations. It is the only RIGHT thing to do. It is the only RESPONSIBLE thing to do.

I would like to respond to Lynn Taylor's statement. You may post the response below or forward it to her.
Thank you.
My name is Richard. I am the one who discovered the pasted images in the "Alien Chorus" photo. I am writing this in response to your very passionate posting to the RENSE.COM website. I do not work for RENSE.COM. I am not a Self-Appointed expert of photo- analysis. I do not have Ph.D's and MD's in the field of physics, biophysics, biology, medical, or zoology. What I am just a regular, hard working guy who gets up at 5:30 every morning, goes to work in Atlanta morning traffic, and looks forward to the weekend. I work in an office as an IT professional. I have eight (8) years experience in supporting Computer Users, providing network administration, and have also designed and administered websites. I have extensive experience with computer graphics design and the various file formats and compressions that are used in their creation.
It is slow in the mornings and I like to look through several news websites to update myself on the current events. RENSE.COM is one of the sites I regularly check.
I also have a fascination with the unexplainable events in our world. Even though I would accept the reality of the situation if UFOs, bigfoot, ghosts, etc. are proven real, that IF depends on them being proven real. It does not matter how the scrutiny is perceived, the cold, hard, bottom of the line fact is that any evidence of an unexplained occurrence...ANY...will be put under a microscope and examined. I want to believe but I will thoroughly take it apart piece by piece to verify that it is what it is. When I saw the photo yesterday morning, I noticed that the proportions seemed slightly off for the size and placement of the "ETs." I used the methods I detailed in my original posting, and I stand by what I discovered. The squared off pixelation does not occur naturally. Plus the shade of black in the squared off pixels was an ENTIRELY different shade of black from the shades of black in the entire photo. These are clear signs of what is called the "Copy and Paste" method occurring where you copy a portion of one image and place (paste) it on top of an other image. I realize that there are skeptics out there that will use the standard responses of, " IT WAS A WEATHER BALLOON," or, "IT WAS SWAMP GAS," or " ITS A FAKE" when looking at any UFO photo. I am just as sick if not more of these closed minded people, BUT they do provide a gauge on how we MUST conduct ourselves.
IF evidence does present itself, such as this "ALIEN CHORUS" photo for example, we have to scrutinize it just as hard as the skeptics if not harder. Sooner or later, evidence will be found that cannot be explained away or refuted. The odds are in our favor. It will happen. Weither that is 10 days away or 10 years away, we don't know, but it will happen. Until then, everything has to be put under the microscope. The one thing that hinders the objective is people who present hoaxes and fraudulent evidence.
As I have said, I am not an expert of photo- analysis, but I have worked with, designed, manipulated, and created graphics for websites and personal photos to know what to look for in a manipulated digital image, and unfortunately the "ALIEN CHORUS" photo has VERY VERY clear signs of photo manipulation. If you tried to present this photo as evidence of an unexplained occurrence to the media, the world, or a court of law, ANY photo expert ( pro-UFO or ANTI-UFO / doesn't matter ) will see this and would have to admit that the photo has clear signs of manipulation and would lose ALL credibility as evidence. There is no personal agenda in this fact, there is no suppression of evidence, no clandestine conspiracy to eliminate this photo. The photo itself gives the evidence and nothing can change that. Lynn, I am sorry if you have taken this as a personal attack on your friend and yourself, but facts are facts. I do not look kindly on hoaxes and frauds and that spilled out in my words yesterday. The photo shows signs of manipulation. If there is a negative and it can be examined and shows something different, then I will reconsider my position, but I only have that website image and the photographers word that it is real. The website image does not prove itself to me, and I do not know the photographer, or you for that matter, so I have no reason to put my faith in their word. Our evidence is clear. I do not understand how, if you are such a proponent of being open minded to the unbelievable, you can be so closed minded to something so obvious. Use the method I detailed and take the image from that website. You will get the results that we have gotten. What you do with that evidence is up to you.

Thank you.
Comment from Robert M. Collins

I read your headline story: No mention of a hoax: Where are you coming from ? Marilyn had experts do a detailed analysis and she said there was no evidence of a hoax...What kind of amateurs are you using ?
Note Marilyn Ruben's comments below at,
Then see a reported Abductees comments at,
NOTICE ANY SIMILARITIES ? That humming electric noise ?
Now, remember Tesla's Experiments and the Philadelphia Experiment and those anomalous effects that were reported ?
Is this reported "hum" a signature of an approaching "Space-time" rift in the metric or teleportation is just about to take place ?
Things to think about ?
Robert M
Jeff Rense replied:
Note: two photo analyses of the 'choir' seem to indicate it is a hoax...pixels don't usually speak with forked tongue. see my headlines for the story.
I don't use amateurs. I don't use plural amateurs, either. James is handling this entirely. He is a brilliant graphics expert, who has, over the years, exposed several important UFO hoaxes. We always publish both sides of a story...some of yours included. We always welcome further documentation and I hope to get some from Marilyn's organization...she's a pro. This is reminiscent of the daylight saucer over Mexico City ...which still remains a question mark. I presented all viewpoints and images back then, showing how it was a 'hoax' AND also how others showed that it wasn't. The pixels in those Mexico video grabs showed signs of strangeness, too. Until we see solid work from the *original* choir photo, and the names of the 'experts' who have certified authenticity, the jury is out. Jpgs are controversial to work with at best. If people post them on the net and state they are real, they sure as hell ought to be able to entertain some opposing views. That's why there is a question mark on the headline for this story. In fact, if it were me, I would welcome the controversy and I would bring out my big gun 'experts' with original print/negative work and DAZZLE the world. Let's put the evidence on the table and knock people over. 'He said, she said' doesn't work too well.
To: Robert Collins
of course, but in this case, I say: bullshit. who the hell gives a tinker's damn if somebody takes a photo of something like this? what is all this 'fear' business?
the ONLY thing that ought to be protected is the NAME of the shooter.
'they' can discredit anything and anyone anytime...they've been practicing their art for over 60 years.
we don't even have a camera type identification that I'm aware of. bad news.
until and unless full disclosure happens, this will remain in Stan's grey basket.
like it or not, the 'secrecy' around this and the 'fear' of the owner of the photo to say, "Gee, I took this photo with a (such and such) camera and the conditions I observed were (blah blah)...what to you people think this might be?" are dooming this photo to endless tail-chasing.
the lack of data does NOT equal hoax...Jeff you and I both know that witnesses are scared and afraid and don't want to come out in the open

...Rmc wrote:

Bruce C made a nice try but as you notice in James' replication of the effect the color of the side of the garage roof got changed: Also, I'd like know except in someone's wild imagination how a combination of tree branches, trunks etc, etc can produce the fine details of head, eye sockets, arms, and legs, and a rounded bottom in one of the figures: This whole effort to "explain" the figures has become a real stretch in my opinion......Rmc
Hi Robert,

This is the taste that some, not all, are reporting after reading through the story. As you know, I always like a good discussion.
This fellow's point is one that should not be a factor...but it is. We need full disclosure on this, on that I trust we agree. I would be pleased if this turns out to be a real photograph of visitors.


RMC wrote: "Also, I'd like know except in someone's wild imagination how a combination of tree branches, trunks etc, etc can produce the fine details of head, eye sockets, arms, and legs, and a rounded bottom in one of the figures" ---

Eye sockets???? From more than 2 blocks away? There's no eye sockets in that green blur! Arms? Legs? Someone in having serious halucenations! It is so obvious that we're dealing with a fluke photo someone decided to palm off as aliens on a roof (ho, ho, ho!).
Hoax Contention Supported By Lack Of Data
From Tom McArdle
Dear Jeff:
After reading the recently posted update, my questions are what is the rest of the story and why is there only one photograph? How long were the "ET's" observed? What did they do while being observed? How did they disappear? Were there any other witnesses? The lack of information associated with the photograph supports the contention that it is a hoax.
Tom McArdle


Original Article

Marilyn Ruben writes: "Alien Abduction Experience and Research (AAER) has received an excellent photograph of six glowing aliens standing on a garage roof at night that look like a singing choir. This September 29, 2000, a photograph was taken after the witness saw movement and heard a sound like "humming electric lines."
The photograph of the possible glowing aliens was studied by biophysicist Dr. William C. Levengood of Pinelandia Biophysics Laboratory, Grass Lake, Michigan. The photograph shows a group of what appear to be glowing aliens standing on a roof at night. Glowing aliens are not new to abductees and experiencers who have reported seeing them. But why would the aliens appear to be glowing? Is there a possible physics explanation for this?
According to biophysicist Dr. Levengood, the appearance of glowing aliens may be attributed to "a very significant Doppler shift in a highly active energy form, which is beyond our ordinary methods of monitoring electromagnetic energy. The final state from this Doppler shift appears to be in the 'actinic region' of the spectrum where it stimulates photo-luminescence in the green region of the visible spectrum." Note to readers: "Actinic" means in the region of the x-ray and ultraviolet light.
The 'alien choir' photo was studied at length by various scientists with Ph.D's and MD's in the field of physics, biophysics, biology, medical, zoology, etc. This emphasis on scientific investigation is what makes AAER different from other web sites. AAER is deeply entrenched in field work and lab experiments involving Quantum Physics, and Quantum Mechanics.
The photograph and enhancements may be seen at

This Site Served by TheHostPros