Alien Autopsy Articles


by Theresa Carlson (Minnesota MUFON Field Investigator)
While much has been written on the topic of the Alien Autopsy footage, most of it concentrated on the people and events involved in the footage being made public. Though these things are important to the over all picture, the footage itself deserves an evaluation as well.

The consensus in ufological circles seems to be that the footage is a hoax, and the expectation that if it is not, should be proven real. There are two favored opinions for the hoax hypothesis. One, that what we are seeing in the footage is a human body, the other, that movie special effect artists created the footage. As any researcher knows the facts in any case being investigated, must fit the theory. Both of these theories leave some unanswered questions.

Many of the comments made about the footage, are simply incorrect. Some of this is because many people have commented on only the footage shown on various television programs, rather than the entire footage itself. Others have watched the full footage but not examined it thoroughly. Contrary to what is being said, not all the frames in the footage are out of focus. Close and thorough examinations of the images reveals details missed during cursory examination.


First we have to ask, "Who was she?". Judging by her muscular build, she appears well cared for and healthy, regardless of her deformities. If this was a human, a girl, suffering from some genetic disorder or rare disease, someone would have known her, family, doctors, or neighbors. Seen by millions of people, all over the world, it is a wonder that no one recognized her. At this time, I won't go over all the defects and deformities of the body, as they are numerous and obvious. However, no one has yet explained the extreme deformities satisfactorily with any known diseases or disorders.

Do we have an explanation for the eye coverings? If they were a protective covering to keep the eyes moist, as speculated, why would the doctors remove them during the procedure? Also, why would they preserve these coverings? Can we explain the obscure, transparent article removed from the chest area?

We find more questions in the opened body. The internal organs are not human. The brain is not human. The reflected skin reveals no subcutaneous fat layer. While some diseases will diminish body fat considerably, the reflected skin shows no fat whatsoever. Also missing from this body are veins, arteries, mamilla, and a navel.

How do we explain the injuries? The right leg shows extensive damage. The right hand is partially severed, though not disconnected from the arm as has been claimed, and appears badly burned. How would a girl suffering from a rare disease get hurt this badly and no one know about it?

It is important to note here, that there is more footage showing another autopsy. While not released to the public, several people have seen and described this other autopsy footage. The body in that one has the same deformities and defects but without the injuries. The same body could not be in both films, since dissection occurs on both bodies. Do we have twins with the same disease or defects? That would be even more of a wonder, that they never made it into medical textbooks, or that someone didn't know them.

The possibility of an altered human corpse has also mentioned, however, it would take so much altering to make a human corpse look like what we see here, that it would no longer be human. Again two corpses with the same alterations would be needed to do this. Among the alterations, the internal organs would have to be replaced, and the skin replaced. During the reflection of the scalp, we clearly see the "peeling" of the skin from the skull. The film is rolling during this, so there isn't time to rig it as they go along. This sequence, not shown in most TV broadcasts, is missed by most people.

Apart from the basic form being humanoid, there is nothing about this body that appears to be human when closely examined.


This theory would answer most of the questions and problems brought up by the human body theory, though it raises a few questions of its own as well.

These days, special effect artists can create practically anything, but this footage being created by some amateur as a practical joke, is not particularly likely. It required considerable time, work and money to produce the autopsy film. We must ask, "Who did this?" and look at what it would take to create what we see in the footage. As a special effect's production, it's carefully scripted and planned. There are too many details for it to have been accidental or thrown together in a hurry.

The props in the footage are correct for the period the footage supposedly depicts. The creators researched and obtained these. It was first thought that the telephone was the wrong year, but later it was proven to be correct for the time. Even the electrical outlets are consistent. It is not unusual for anachronisms or props to be wrong even in high budget Hollywood films, so we expected to find some in this footage. After exhaustive examination, there are none.

The clock is a very important prop. The entire autopsy footage, scripted so that the timing was perfect. That means, if they had to stop the clock for any reason, such as touch ups or adding body parts, they had carefully set it back to the correct time for the procedures depicted. Interestingly, the electrical cord on the clock has a kink. That kink remains consistent in the footage, from beginning to end. This means that if they moved the clock, they carefully put that cord back exactly the same way it was every time. Other options may be, a wall switch controlling the outlet, or a remote control device of some kind to stop and start the clock at precisely the right times. Perhaps this kind of detail is second nature to people that work in special effects. In any case, the accurate timing is evident, and shows careful attention to details.

Due to statements made that the autopsy procedures performed in this footage were not standard, I attended several autopsies, as part of my research. No two were exactly the same. However, the general, overall procedures in the footage are those used in autopsies. Therefore, the producers of this footage did research this area. The high cut on the neck, noted as non-standard, however, is used if removal of the skin on the face anticipated. We don't see this procedure in the footage, as it ends while the doctor is still working on the head, but since it is an 'alien autopsy', presumably they would want to skin the face and examine the underlying structures. Good thinking by the special effect creators!

One puzzling detail is one of the props. The human brain is a gel-like substance and after removal during an autopsy, it's suspended in a jar of liquid to "fix" it. The brain in this body is a solid organ, and so doesn't need such suspension. Yet, sometime during the reflection of the scalp the type of jar used for this, is placed on the table, with the liquid in it. This shows remarkable insight on the part of the effects people, since they would have known the brain was a solid organ and they would not need that jar. However, they must have known that some of us were going to look for it. Had it been part of a 'standard autopsy props' kit one would expect it to be there from the beginning of the procedure, like the flask, the Bunsen burner and other items on that table are.

While there are many details missed about the body itself, the one fact that must be the most important is that many people believe it is a real body. This, seems to me, would be the highest compliment paid to someone in special effect field, implying that the creators were highly talented. However, as a special effect production it's intentionally made to depict an alien autopsy. So why didn't the creators make it look like the common aliens, the small, thin, frail, grey-skinned creatures that have become so popular in the past decade?

A detail, probably not noticed by many, is the jointed fingers on at least one hand. The hand gets caught on the doctor's suit and the fingers curl up. The hand catching may have been an accident but the finger bending was not. Also the hands show creases and lines in the palms, much as our hands have. A wasted detail as most people miss it due to the intentional out of focus camerawork. This camera work is planned and scripted and has to be considered very well done.

Moreover, the autopsy room is not an open set as has been claimed. The four walls do appear in the footage. However, one has to look for them as they are not obvious. Of course, this doesn't mean that it isn't a set, only that it is a more complex set than what most people think. The producers hired the actors or played the various roles we see in the footage themselves and provided the costumes they wear. Another, puzzling detail, in a short sequence there is an extra person in the room wearing the same costume. At least five people were involved in the making of this film and so far, none are talking.

We don't really know that the autopsy only took two hours, because the clock is a twelve hour clock, and it may have taken fourteen hours or twenty-six hours. Actually, what we are looking at is most likely about two hours worth of procedures. However, human autopsies, are done in about half an hour, and sometimes less. The viscera and necessary tissue are removed, the body is closed up and released. The in-depth examination takes place later. The person that wrote the script for this footage realized this and added extra time, since it supposedly is an 'alien autopsy'. The doctor is still working on the body when the film ends, so it could have taken longer.

Also, if they had done a very lengthy examination, it would surely be evidence that this was a hoax. Consider that if the military was responsible for this autopsy, the scientific study of this thing would not be a priority. They were in the business of defence and the first thing they would want to know is how to defend against them. There would be more interest in how to kill it than what made it tick. The scientific analysis could come later. Again, the scriptwriter was paying attention to detail.

Not as much can be said about the debris footage included in this production, mainly because there isn't much of it. Still, the debris would have had to be designed and created, especially for this footage, as these aren't scraps that one can find lying around in any junkyard. Comparing the approximate size and shape of the hand prints on the panels to the hands on the body, they appear to be consistent.

In the debris part of the footage, there was an actual tent set up outdoors or a set that included wind. The sides of the tent billow, as though there was a breeze outside it. Another wasted effect, as very few people notice it.

The special effects theory is certainly a possible explanation for what we see in this footage. But it's put together with considerable care and attention and is not a simple prank. The producers went to great lengths to try to convince someone that this was a real event. They went above and beyond what is needed for a simple money making scheme.


With some missing details pointed out, can we now decide which of these best fits what we are looking at in this footage? Is it a human body, a special effect's creation, or something else?


Theresa Carlson is a member of the Mutual UFO Network, and can be reached at MUFON on Compuserve, (GO MUFON) E-mail: . A Computer Technician and Graphics and Imaging Specialist, she has spent over a year examining the Santilli film, frame at a time. Her research has taken her into human autopsy rooms and put her in contact with the people involved with The Film, including Santilli himself, producers of "Alien Autopsy:Fact or Fiction", and other mysterious figures who prefer their names not be mentioned.


Back to Index Page

NOTICE: For all reports, data, etc. submitted: Anonymity will be preserved where requested.

To submit UFO, Abduction, Crop Circle, or Cattle Mutilation reports for inclusion here,
e-mail: Webmaster, but please read "Making a Report" first. Thanks.

This html content (c)Copyright 1996-1999, Joel Henry and/or above named authors.
All rights reserved. Any probs send e-mail to: Webmaster