Recently a deeply fascinating and challenging UFO book was published by the Danish painter, photographer and researcher Rene Erik
Olsen – The George Adamski Story – Historical Events Of Gigantic Implications.
By doing digital enhancements from copies of the original negatives taken by
George Adamski, Rene Erik Olsen has succeeded in presenting unique and unknown
details in the photos and films. Details which give a whole new dimension to
the controversial George Adamski case.
Rene Erik Olsen was born in 1956, educated in the
military and spent 30 years in the financial world. Painting has been his
interest for many years and he is now working as a professional photographer
doing lots of photoshoots. Special interests are research into UFOs and their
technology. Visit his beautiful and inspiring website here.
Håkan: What started your UFO interest?
Rene: An observation 1966, together with my family, when
I was 10 years old. A disc, around 8-10 meters, moving close to our house – maneuvering
in an erratic way, standing still, moving again and disappearing extremely fast
upwards.
Håkan: Are
you a member of any UFO group?
Rene: No.
Håkan: Most mainstream UFO researchers are very
skeptical of George Adamski. How come you decided to study his experiences,
photos and films?
Rene: I know that many people are skeptical of the
Adamski case. I am not a ”believer” of everything about this case (at least not
at face-value) but the photographs has always looked real to me. That is why I
thought it worth while to study some of the images closer. Those first photos
of the mothership and the objects around it (taken in 1951) looked hard to fake
to me (double exposures could be one way to fake such photos, but it takes a
really good knowledge of how to do double exposures and I understand that
Adamski did not have such specific photographic knowledge)) – but they look
real. Also the images in Flying Saucers Have Landed – are particularly good. I
do consider these real as well. As it happened I was sent these four Brownie
photos by Glenn Steckling in 2001 for another project (animation of the desert
landing). I then had them on a hard disk for 16 years – until I considered them
worthy of a good look. Had always thought that two of them looked like something
could be enhanced and details brought forward.
Rene Erik Olsen
Håkan: When did you begin to consider Adamski´s case
as genuine?
Rene: Well, as stated previously, I am not a fan of
everything Adamski – or for that matter other contactee-cases, as a clear
pattern in contact-cases is that the contactee often times embellish in – shall
we say – less than truthful ”stories” to keep the ”fans” interested. A reason
for this could be that they no longer are in contact with the ”aliens” and
therefore ”make up” their own stories to keep people interested in the case. It
is often seen – unfortunately (The Meier case for instance). But the Adamski photos and films – these can be
forensically researched – without being influenced by the case as such.
Everyone can do it. Nobody should be scared to do so. Unfortunately most
researchers are scared of everything that has the name ”Adamski” on it –
including the photos and films.
Håkan: What, in your view, is the strongest evidence
in favor of Adamski?
Rene: The photos and films (those of them which I
have been enhancing) and the witnesses to the first contact on 20th November
1952. Those things will always – to me – be the strongest evidence.
Håkan: Has anyone duplicated your efforts in
enhancements of Adamski´s photos and films, to check your results?
Rene: I have no idea. Nobody has contacted me in
this regard – even though it would be easy to check the results (you need a
good knowledge of how to use Photoshop). It could be that nobody really has the
inclination – since ”the Adamski case has already been proven a fake” by all
the big players in Ufology. Or maybe there is nobody who is sincere enough, who
wants to put their name to anything ”Adamski”.
Photo by George Adamski, December 13, 1952
Håkan: Today it is very easy to fake UFO photos and
films. What would be your answer if accused of faking the enhancements?
Rene: I will agree that anything is possible with
all the software available today, but the original films – your eyes
(especially when you see the films) cannot ”fake” what you see in front of you.
Especially the Mexico film and the Silver Spring film – they are just so
”bizarre” that your eyes and brain just need time to understand what is going
on in front of you – and no ”software” can ”undo” what is really there in front
of you. The photos which I have researched are from 1952 – they are NOT double
exposures or anything of the sort. Anybody can investigate the same films and
photos and get the same results – that is my answer.
In support of my findings it was actually Michel
Zirger who discovered some of the things in Brownie frame 1 (the one with the
mothership in the upper left corner and the three crafts) and not me. I just
enhanced what we both agreed we saw in the frame. The enhancement process
anybody - with a good knowledge of photoshop – can do. Enhancements do not
bring out what is not there from the start. I am actually surprised that at least the skeptics
of the Adamski case has not come forward to dismiss the enhancements, but
nothing of the sort has happened. Maybe because the enhancements are showing the
real thing.
Håkan: What has been the response to your book The
George Adamski Story?
Rene: Very positive. A few people have told me that had
been waiting a long time for a closer look at the Adamski material. No skeptics
have contacted me at all.
Håkan: Are there any photos or films by Adamski that
you regard as dubious or not genuine?
Rene: I cannot claim to have seen all of the Adamski
material – I wish I had that opportunity.
I have only been asked to enhance a few things for Glenn Steckling of the
Adamski Foundation. And that does not include the Brownie photos – they were
done of my own interest. What I have enhanced I can clearly say – the raw
material (film and photos) is real. I cannot remember having seen anything
which would make me say that ”they were of dubious nature” – but again, I have
not seen all of the Adamski photo and film evidence.
Rene Erik Olsen
Håkan: Will you continue researching the Adamski
case?
Reen: Oh yes, there are so much material that
another book is in the works. I only hope that Glenn Steckling will keep
sending me material to be enhanced. In so many ways the Adamski case and the material is very unique.
Håkan: What do you hope to achieve with your
research?
Rene: I hope to inform other researchers and people
in general about the extraordinary evidence for another form of intelligence
outside of the Earth, who actively are visiting the Earth – both in the past
and now and that George Adamski produced some evidence for this ”extraordinary
technology” both in photos and films.
Håkan: Do you favor any specific UFO theory?
Rene: No. Certain is it though that ”the visitors”
need some form of transportation surrounded by shields to move around in the
Earth atmosphere. This is what is being photographed and filmed and also
observed.
Rene Erik Olsen photographing a "Venusian beauty"
Håkan: Have you had any other personal UFO or
paranormal experiences?
Rene: Two other sightings. One with multible
objects, more than ten, moving high in the sky at sunset. Another sighting,
daytime, with a single object moving erratically
Håkan: What is your general worldview?
Rene: I think we are here on Earth to do the best we
can, in any given situation with the aid of our knowledge of what is good or
bad, right or wrong. Pure and simple. I assume we have one chance in life. So
do your best in all situations. That is my life philosophy.
Håkan: Are you a member of any spiritual group or
church?
Rene: No.
Håkan: What advice would you give to new UFO
researchers?
Rene: Look at every aspect of this field with an open
mind (just like life itself). Never judge anything because it is ”beyond-your-understanding”
– It could be you just need to ”adjust” your frame of mind.
