Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Leslie Kean: Wolf! Wolf!

Sources close to The UFO Trail indicate Leslie Kean and Chilean authorities have much more data supporting the existence of nearby wolves than they have yet fully disclosed. While skeptics have been quick to warn no wolf has been substantiated, Kean continued to assert monumental film footage is securely in the hands of the Chileans, urging that all information be fully taken into account before dismissing the carnivores out of hand.

"But they are the ones withholding the alleged footage," one interested party complained. "What the hell is she talking about?"

Kean defended her reporting methods and the investigative techniques of the Chileans, suggesting she has fallen victim to an anti-wolf debunking campaign. They will go to any lengths to deny the public the truth, Kean reportedly told those close to her, repeatedly pointing out she has generals, pilots and government officials going on record to confirm the reality of a large scale wolf cover-up.

"She and Bermudez brought it all up and sensationalized it in the first place," one critical thinker, commenting on the condition of anonymity due to fearing retribution for their lack of gullibility, informed The UFO Trail. "They cried wolf and then got all butt hurt people expected them to actually produce the evidence they claimed to have." 


For related information, see:

A Chilean page recently removed from the Internet that included another video of the exact air show in question in which virtually every scene contained insects and birds - and Kean continued to fail to either acknowledge or address.

A video created by stiver, the finder of the above Chilean page/video, addressing relevant details. 

Another video created by stiver, referencing just a few of the discrepancies contained in Kean's HP follow up article.

Research worthy of consideration conducted by DrDil and HOAXKiller1.

A 2011 article, FAA Instructions to Staff on UFO Sightings Debunk Cover-Up Claims, written by Ryan Dube and demonstrating how Kean refused to revise her position on a story, publishing her preferred version, even after having been presented evidence directly contradicting her preconceived angle.


  1. Nice piece!

    It does seem that Kean is actively assisting the promoters of this case in hiding the data. Sadly this a common practice in ufoology.


    1. Thanks, Lance! I appreciate your support and interest.

      I chose to take a satirical approach to this post because I very much wanted to acknowledge and respect the work of stiver and others, but at the same time I feel pretty annoyed there is even any debate taking place. Suffice it to say that, at this stage of the El Bosque fiasco, it is pretty futile to even bother to address the many gaping holes in the story with anyone who prefers to think extraterrestrials are in it.

    2. One thing of possibly relevant interest I noticed some time back, on one of the UFO mailing lists, was a rather obscure comment by Dr. Richard Haines, who said he'd been in consultation with CEFAA and examined the video tapes concerned, under non-disclosure, prior to the initial article by Kean on HuffPo, and had provided his analysis to CEFAA with the understanding it was confidential. He noted after Kean went public and the head of CEFAA went public at the IUFOC, that he no longer felt bound to that non-disclosure, but oddly did not proffer his opinion on the tapes themselves!

      To me, that indicates Haines analysis most probably suggests and may have concluded the object(s) shown in the collective 7 video tapes concerned were not of a UFO, per se, but something else, which may have been insects/birds.

      Kean needs to restraint herself in making premature announcements, and CEFAA needs to come clean and disclose both Haines and their own findings about what may or may not be show by cross-analysis of the entirety of the tapes, publicly. The fact that that still has not happened does not bode well for the legitimacy, integrity, or competence of both CEFAA and Kean being honestly objective about those video tapes, I'm afraid.

  2. If only Leslie Kean had stayed out of this case and let local investigators in Chile handle it solely.

    If she's made a mistake it does not diminish her excellent work in her bestselling book -'UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record'.

    ~ Susan Brown

    1. At this point, I agree with you, Brownie. I think Leslie may have jumped the gun based on her trust of the Chilean officials she had dealt with in the past. If the unreleased videos prove bugs, I'll bet she'll own up to it. I highly doubt she is 'actively assisting the promoters of this case in hiding the data.'

    2. Anonymous, I too doubt that Kean is "actively assisting the promoters of this case in hiding the data", considering the agenda-driven source of the quote. ;-)

      ~ Susan

  3. sorry (sort of) for the thread necro, but it seems that Kean is indeed "actively assisting" the promoters of this case... which I think is, really, herself.

    For proof:

    In this article, she doubles down that they are not bugs, and pointedly calls out skeptics and debunkers. Then, rather than addressing two major issues with her evidence... that out-of-focus insects in the foreground often leave distorted images, and that at least one of the objects is seen as being close to the camera and tiny, as it flies in front of some ground foliage.

    This isn't to say these aren't tiny UFOs. You can't tell what they are (they could be tiny alien craft!), but statistically, and best judgment would point to bugs.

    Instead, she spends the entire article bringing up issues that are not part of the criticism. She contacts entomologists for their best guess on what kind of bug the blurs are. Are these entomologists also aware of how out-of-focus insects appear typically on digital footage? I guess to her credit she shows a few blurry insects. But that was more to use as the claim that all blurred insects look like her examples, which isn't the case.

    That she purposely wrote an entire article and contacted experts (hopefully actually contacted them) for their opinions to rebut skeptical analysis of the Chilean UFO videos while assiduously avoiding the flaws brought up by those skeptics indicates that she's aware of the serious hole in her story, and is intentionally fabricating a flawed rebuttal. This points me in the direction that Kean is more interested in protecting her UFO community cred and ultimately her bottom line, rather than the truth.