Doing damage control and gearing up for the appearance of UFO fraud Jonathan Reed at the upcoming International UFO Congress, fanatical Reed supporter Dan Iaria has posted at his site more of what he calls proof that Reed's poppycock UFO encounter is real.

Offering little more than a picture and an assumption sprinkled with some fact, Iaria claims that a photo of Reed's so-called alien proves that the object in the photo is organic in nature. Iaria claims that the 'red-eye' shown in the photo below "proves that this creature was an organic, living creature...not a papier-mâché or rubber movie prop as some have tried to suggest."

Iaria also states that "the important point to drive home here is that it is a phenomenon that is ONLY produced when photographing LIVING creatures."

Sounds good right? Wrong. The 'red-eye' effect is indeed common place in photography and occurs when a flash is employed. I believe that most everyone has seen this in their photos at one time or another. However, this effect can be reproduced and has been done in the FX industry. It doesn't take much to accomplish this and you don't have to be an expert in FX to do it either.

Enter acrylic. A fabulous material used in paint, models, billiard balls and other items. What other items you may ask? Below you'll see what an acrylic ball looks like.

By tinting the backside of the ball, let's say you'd use the color red, the front of the ball will capture the light and color in the same way as the 'red-eye' effect, flare center and all. Special effects professional and UFO experiencer Steve Neill stated that he "used to do this all the time when I did makeup effects. To get a monster's eyes to glow this always worked because it creates the same effect as in nature." When asked what he thought about the alien in Reed's photos, Neill stated, "If I were to hand in as a final product, that alien rubber head, I'd get fired. You'd think he'd hire a better sculpture. Complete crap."

Another way to easily reproduce this effect would be to use Adobe Photoshop or a similar program. I put together the following picture myself in about one-minute. Given more time, I could make it look very impressive. You can also note that a gloved finger is partially covering part of the 'red-eye.' This element was far too simple to add.

As you can see, it doesn't really take much to alter a photo. This has been proven time and again. If you'll notice, I even added the 'red-eye' effect to the other eye slit that is barely open. The photo on the left contained no such 'red-eye' effect until I added it. For Iaria to proclaim Reed's photo as absolute proof is simply foolish. It proves nothing. Iaria states that the image is a duplicate from Reed's website:

The problem with this being used as 'evidence' is that it clearly states on Reed's official website:

So much for being unaltered photos. "In one or two cases they were retouched to remove defects and correct exposure problems." One or two cases? This says it all. Why would they retouch any of the photos to begin with? Reed's official site states that photos appearing there are not to be used for investigative purposes since they've been altered. In other words, they've altered their own so-called evidence to cover their asses.

Since the Reed folks have lied so many times already, why should we start believing them now? That's just it, we shouldn't. The other problem here is that most of Reed's alien photos appear to have used focus light and not a flash. In the photo at the top of this page, why is everything else so dark? You'd expect to see much more detail if a flash was used considering the "alien" is laying on a thermal blanket which is very reflective. "Artistic effect"? I could be mistaken, but I seriously doubt any flash was used. Just look at the photos below and you can clearly see a concentration of light:

Let's take another look at that acrylic ball:

Iaria states, "Since our adversaries, few that there are, don't possess a lick of common sense, I don't expect them to understand the simple logic of this. However, I have no doubt that our thousands of intelligent supporters will have no trouble grasping the importance of this case-validating observation."

There is no doubt that intelligent people will grasp what the Reed case is really all about - fraud. This is just more speculation and eye-candy being offered in the absence of real proof, which Reed has none with the exception of his bogus photos, his third rate alien tale and the ever so growing mountain of lies that continue to follow this case. And don't be fooled, no serious UFO researcher gives this case any serious consideration. The only thing this case gets is a good laugh every now and then, until some realize that there are people willing to believe this hoax no matter what. Iaria is no exception...

Iaria states, "I also think it is important to state that, without exception, every piece of evidence I have uncovered and all of my investigation results have absolutely shown this case to be real."

Yet another misleading statement. Perhaps in Iaria's opinion, his "investigation" is providing all the truth he needs or wants to find. Reed and his cohorts have avoided addressing many issues. Reed won't provide simple information for investigators to follow up on. Reed's alleged work in the field of psychiatry is a lie and his time line is off by several years. We know that Harold Chacon isn't a doctor as was, in fact, claimed by Robert Raith - his real name is Robert Aria. There are far too many lies and inconsistencies in this case.

Don't let Reed or Raith hustle you. Don't let their fanatical followers and supporters fool you either. Deep down, they all know the truth about his case, and that truth doesn't currently fit in with their beliefs. Don't let belief override your common sense - demand proof. Don't let anyone who has their whole life invested in this lie dictate what common sense is and what it isn't. Don't be fooled by simple photos, they're too easy to manipulate. Look mom, no more red-eye...