User reviews

Innovative six-part docuseries uses artificial intelligence lie-detection software to revisit footage of first-person accounts from eyewitnesses and experts regarding the alleged cover-up of a UFO incident from 1947.

No spoilers - I really enjoyed each episode, even if the "AI" animation silliness superimposed over decades old film is the gimmick.

Two complaints- 1) STOP with the ridiculous and teeth grindingly annoying "teletype" sound at the open of EVERY new segment. JUST STOP.

2) Constant recap after recap and scene set-up after scene set-up. Merely wastes time and extends each episode, for what reason I can not guess.

I find this quite entertaining, even if the logic is flawed.

AI is used to determine if a person is telling the truth: It's analyzing decade old video, and sometimes only audio. I doubt the accuracy is very high but even if it was, most of the interviews are accounts from friends and family who heard stories.

There are a few 1st hand accounts (video) from people like Jesse Marcel which are quite good.

Despite that, I do like listening to the stories of credible witnesses (military people). I find it more interesting than actual "video evidence" of lights in the sky, etc.

Some people treat the UFO mystery as a religion and take it all too seriously. But for me this is entertainment only and I enjoy it.

As a great believer in ufo phenomena it really is a shame that the subject gets dealt with in this way. They could have spent just 5 minutes telling us what we already know and just ditch the stupid AI assessments. I mean, really, are we expected to believe a dumb computer could analyze the faces of some 30,40and 50 year old film with any amount of accuracy? A great film for the non believers arsenal. Very bad.

There are too many respected people that saw the debris and the aliens. That material was not from a weather balloon; that is absurd. My uncle was one of the students that saw the aliens and he would not lie to me. They were told not to tell anyone what they saw and there would be dire consequences if they did. He never told anyone for 40 years and only told my father and me. Believe me, it happened! Watch the original Robert Stack Unsolved Mysteries episode on Roswell; he told me that was accurate. So, I know for sure it did happen and like I said, too many witnesses saw the proof. The material was a weather balloon is ridiculous! Anyway, thanks for reading this. It is all true!

Lets suppose that I tell my daughter that once I saw a flock of flying pigs with my own eyes. Years later after my passing she recounts the day I told her my account of the flying pigs. The most advanced generalized intelligence ever made by man running on a pseudo-entangled quantum computer analyzes her telling of the story and determines that she is 100% truthful. The world can now be rest assured that flying pigs are real.

That sounds like an appeal to ignorance and several other human fallacies at work. It's dumb.

So, if you can dismiss the crackhead logic used in this show and watch it purely for entertainment then it's still dumb.

All that I can really say is that you better hope I'm not the one that the aliens ask for advice as to why they shouldn't nuke us from orbit.

The first woman 'analyzed' to see if she was lying was rehashing a story someone else told her. Even if the AI could tell if she was telling the truth, she didn't see anything herself. The only thing she was telling the truth about is that someone else told her a story. How does that prove anything at all?

The whole show is absurd.

This is a great show and now, thanks to the sophisticated AI, we know that ETs crashed near Roswell in 1947.

I have been researching the Roswell Incident since 1994 from an investigative journalist's perspective. I have come to the conclusion that the notion that an alien craft crashed on the Foster Ranch in 1947 is a hoax. I could sway a jury in a court of law today. With that being said, the notion that AI could somehow shed light onto first-hand witness accounts is crazy. But only to google "Roswell hoax" one would reap a vast treasure trove of factual truths and actual lies at his fingertips. For instance, at least five "first hand witnesses" including Gerald Anderson, Jim Ragsdale, Barney Barnett, Glenn Dennis (the funeral home guy), and Frank Kaufman all turned out to be flat-out liars. This coming from the books own authors! But not before their stories were aired on NBC's Unsolved Mysteries. That is the tip of the Hoax iceberg. To me the story behind the hoax and the lengths people went through to legitimize it, is far more interesting. The Army's 1990's Reports on the Roswell incident were 100% correct.

So the use of AI to review decades old video...it's not a bad idea or theory. But most of the stories are from people who were told by someone else and I have always believed this is what most of the people involved were told. The best witness in my opinion is Major Marcell who states what he actually saw with his own eyes and I've never believed a intelligence officer would mistake a balloon with a saucer. The show isn't bad I'd say it's worth the watch..how ever since we are now using AI to determine truths...why don't we run the same software on the more recent accounts of encounters? And government officials? Let's see how that plays out....

...welcome to Roswell: The Final Verdict.

This is an entertaining series, which gave me so many laughs it deserves at least 1 star for its humour value alone, but the logic involved in an AI (still a disturbing thought amongst anyone with an IQ above 100, yet chased after by billionaires like it's the next evolution of humankind,) defining a 1st person story as truth provides numerous instances of smiles, but then they introduce 3rd person accounts from people who heard someone talking about their experiences at Roswell, which the AI confirms as truth.

I hate using this word, but I can't help myself from typing it: seriously?!

The producers of this show were obviously hoping that the average viewer is borderline idiotic, or worse. The people giving this a score of 10 need to reexamine how they look at the world, simply for the sake of those who surround them.

If you want a laugh, interspersed with disdain at the time you've wasted watching it, give it a go. Otherwise avoid like you would the person handing out cult like literature at your local superstore entrance.

The only bad part of this series: it could had been compacted into 2 hours or at least cut in half.

Most of other reviews I read so far talk about AI analysing people who weren't there in 1947. They obviously just watched the first episode and drop out.

I understand that there are people who never gonna believed that aliens are near us since centuries now, until they can see one in person, but sometime those who "debunked' are far more clueless than the wildest theory on that subject. It's a shame.

Just the testimony of Jesse Marcel Jr. Prove that this story really happen.

The military uniforms aren't even American, Col Blanchard and Maj Marcel look more like Italian Army officers. They could of tried harder. Really disappointed in this.

Interesting topic that analysis will show is worth a watch. The truth will be brought forth and I recommend that you give it a watch. The only thing worse than alien abduction is having your production brought down by Trolls.