Roswell for Dummies. :)

originally posted by: HumanOnEarth
Witnesses at the time (including Brazel and his son) reported seeing a trench/gouge. That must have been one seriously hefty balloon.

If you're going to take that angle, you have to remember this was during a particularly violent thunderstorm, as stated by Brazel, with strong winds and heavy rain. It wouldn't take much for balloons and it's payload to be dragged onto ground by the winds and leave gouges in the layer of wet sand. That's only logical and consistent with the wind-blown debris field being fanned out as well. This wasn't a "crash" by an object in clear, dry conditions skipping straight onto hardpan leaving a deep trench in the ground. In that case, you might have a valid argument.

originally posted by: Willtell
One thing about Roswell that I think is important is to consider the absurdity of an alien race coming zillions of miles to earth just to have an accident like any old airplane.

The absurdity also lies in people believing a spacecraft from another world piloted by alien beings skipped along the ground on Fosters ranch leaving pieces of this craft behind that were 100% consistent with our own construction methods of RADAR targets of that exact era. What an astronomical coincidence!
Foil-like Material - CHECK
Small Lightweight Beams - CHECK
Pieces No Larger Than 4 Feet - CHECK
Was there a single foreign piece of this alien spacecraft debris that can't be related to our own Earthly RADAR style payload construction? - NOPE
Amazing.

Stanton Friedman certainly did his job on first selling this story.

a reply to: intrptr

We joined about the same time. I am amazed at the change.

given our respective post counts i feel confident in saying that you are more responsible than me for any changes since we joined

a reply to: aynock

3,384 new posts in the past 24 hours

About a dozen of which are mine.

Drop in the bucket…

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Was there a single foreign piece of this alien spacecraft debris that can't be related to our own Earthly RADAR style payload construction? - NOPE
Amazing.

We never have and never will see or hear anything about the real debris. Just the crap that they replaced it with. If you need to see that stuff, look at the picture of Marcell the press took.

Then just imagine other people there also allowed to get a look at it on and off base.

How long before you think everyone's confused?

Then imagine the secrecy that guarded the Manhattan Project and compare the number of people involved.

a reply to: The GUT
visupview.blogspot.com...
Man, that site just changed my whole world view on the UFO/alien phenomenon. Thanks for the link, sad to realize that probably 75+% of all the ufological material I've read up on is bunk and govt disinformation.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Was there a single foreign piece of this alien spacecraft debris that can't be related to our own Earthly RADAR style payload construction? - NOPE
Amazing.

We never have and never will see or hear anything about the real debris. Just the crap that they replaced it with. If you need to see that stuff, look at the picture of Marcell the press took.

Then just imagine other people there also allowed to get a look at it on and off base.

How long before you think everyone's confused?

Then imagine the secrecy that guarded the Manhattan Project and compare the number of people involved.

So Brazel, Marcel, and Marcels son lied about the debris. The story of Marcel stopping to show his son was all part of this sham in 1947, or complete fabrication? No beams, no foil-like material, no pieces no larger than 4 feet, no large debris field... none of that? Tell me about this debris found that had absolutely no commonality to our balloon target construction. Or is this just more unsubstantiated "conspiracy - cover up" type of BS?

Anyway... My materials mentioned are purposely on the weak end of the overall descriptions made and it still favors an Earthbound explanation. Add the first witnesses with Brazel and the newspaper article description of smokey rubber strips from a balloon that must have been 12 feet long- "if that's how it worked", and eyelets on paper, or his daughters description of "it looked like pieces of a large balloon which had burst", aluminum rings, material that was foil-like on one side and rubber-like on the other, and kite-like sticks and it would become even more apparent what this object actually was.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

So Brazel, Marcel, and Marcels son lied about the debris. The story of Marcel stopping to show his son was all part of this sham in 1947, or complete fabrication?

The word "sham" in the first sentence. Very objective conclusion you present first. He lied the second time as required.

Of course you could interest me in why he fabricated a story and then felt the need to rescind it complete with phony material for a press conference?

The military government intelligence authorities doesn't usually put on press conferences to disprove allegations. They simply say, no comment. Like they give a rats ass what the public thinks about anything they do.

originally posted by: intrptr
Of course you could interest me in why he fabricated a story and then felt the need to rescind it complete with phony material for a press conference?

It fits a lot better with the official story, than with the idea they were trying to cover up anything alien. If the latter they wouldn't want to draw any attention to it, and as you yourself said, they probably wouldn't give it a lot of attention.

But in the official story, since what they recovered wasn't an ordinary weather balloon, and they needed to recover it and examine the debris to determine what it was, even whether it might be some Russian device for example, saying it was a "disk" gives them an excuse to collect the debris and send it to wright-patterson. Then they can say they just found a weather balloon and if rumors start about why they collected debris for a weather balloon, the "disk" story explains it, especially when it was apparently Brazel who came up with the "disk" idea, when he was wondering if the rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks might be a "disk". So they didn't even have to invent the "disk" idea, that apparently came from Brazel.

www.roswellfiles.com...

Brazel related that on June 14 he and 8-year-old son, Vernon were about 7 or 8 miles from the ranch house of the J.B. Foster ranch, which he operates, when they came upon a large area of bright wreckage made up on (sic) rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks.

At the time Brazel was in a hurry to get his round made and he did not pay much attention to it. But he did remark about what he had seen and on July 4 he, his wife, Vernon, and a daughter Betty, age 14, went back to the spot and gathered up quite a bit of the debris.

The next day he first heard about the flying disks, and he wondered if what he had found might be the remnants of one of these.

So it seems like it was Brazel who came up with the idea of calling "rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks" possible remains of a "disk" and since it played into the military's hands to continue to use this while they gathered the debris for analysis, that's my best guess as to why the press release. I think it was one of those situations where you had to be there, not only for the press release, but to be in Brazel's shoes and think of applying "disk" to something that sounds to us now with 20-20 hindsight almost exactly like mogul debris, something Brazel knew nothing about and he was absolutely right that it was unlike any weather balloon he had seen before. Classified memos since declassified also give us clues as to what the debris was:

Psyops

"If the Army Air Force's behaviour in issuing the 'flying disk' press release and then retracting it seems strange to us in hindsight, bear in mind that it did succeed in closing the lid on the story for three decades. This may have been all that was intended, especially if what came down was an item of sensitive, though human, military equipment, even if it wasn't quite the ordinary weather balloon that the Army Air Force's initial retractions would have us believe. Perhaps the most damning pieces of evidence against anything extraterrestrial taking place in Roswell are, ironically, two formerly classified internal documents, one from the FBI, the other from the newly formed US Air Force. The FBI memo, dated 8 July 1947, describes the wreckage being transferred from Fort Worth to Wright Field (now Wright Patterson AFB). The critical section reads:

The disc is hexagonal in shape and was suspended from a balloon by cable, which balloon was approximately twenty feet in diameter. Major Curtain further advised that the object found resembles a high altitude weather balloon with a radar reflector, but that telephonic conversations between their office and Wright Field had not borne out this belief.

"The next item is an internal US Air Force memo sent on 23 September 1947 by General Nathan Twining at Air Material Command, who was responsible for Air Force weapons and technology. Written before the Air Force investigations into the UFO sightings had got under way, it is the first official Air Force statement on the subject and demonstrates that at the highest level of control over America's skies, nobody knew what the hell was going on. After stating that the 'phenomenon is something real and not visionary or fictitious' the memo ends with three points for consideration:

(1) The possibility that these objects are of domestic origin -the product of some high security project not known to... this Command.

(2) The lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash recovered exhibits which would undeniably prove the existence of these subjects.

(3) The possibility that some foreign nation has a form of propulsion possibly nuclear, which is outside of our domestic knowledge...

"What this internal report, written at the very highest level of the Air Force's command structure and kept secret for many years, doesn't say, is that an alien spacecraft had been recovered at Roswell."
(Mirage Men, Mark Pilkington, pgs. 38-40)

Anyway here's the problem with coming out initially and saying it was just an ordinary weather balloon....that wouldn't dispel any rumors abut why they were so interested in collecting the debris, and obviously they were interested in the debris.

a reply to: intrptr

The military government intelligence authorities doesn't usually put on press conferences to disprove allegations. They simply say, no comment. Like they give a rats ass what the public thinks about anything they do.

They were dealing with more then just the US public. 1947 is the start of the Cold War. How do you fight a Cold War? Deception. We are talking about military operations in 1947 in the US. In this context, a misleading press conference doesn't seem unlikely particularly if it involved a top secret project.

At the same time, "flying saucers" are being hyped by the media. It makes perfect sense that the military would be interested in UFO reports if they didn't have a handle on the capabilities of other countries they were at war with.

Even though the debris was consistent with material of the time, it still represented an "unknown" and it still falls within the parameters to qualify as a "flying disk" for that time period.

To me it really makes sense that UFOs would be intertwined with the cold war atmosphere. I really don't see how to get around this.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Anyway here's the problem with coming out initially and saying it was just an ordinary weather balloon....that wouldn't dispel any rumors abut why they were so interested in collecting the debris, and obviously they were interested in the debris.

why do they need to say anything? collect the debris, ask brazel to keep his mouth shut, job done

if they then need to make a statement for whatever reason, they say it was a weather balloon and the rancher asked them to retrieve it because it was bothering his sheep - they could also of course just tell people to mind their own business

if it was a top secret mogul type thing, would they just launch it into the sky to land at random somewhere, and then leave it to sit there for days hoping that someone would tell them where it was?

originally posted by: aynock
if it was a top secret mogul type thing, would they just launch it into the sky to land at random somewhere, and then leave it to sit there for days hoping that someone would tell them where it was?

Who knows. I would bet they had some way to track it but weather happens also. If you have ever been to NM, the weather is rather predictable. Most days its sunny and the temperature doesn't vary much from day to day. I would guess that the area is ideal for this sort of thing. I do believe its a popular place for riding hot air balloons. When a storm comes in, they come in fast and leave just as fast also. This is just from memory from 20 years ago. It can't be trusted.

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

can't find much info on the mogul mo but did find a suggestion that they were well monitored:

Flight #5's ground trajectory shows it passing only 4 miles south of the base (while descending towards its eventually crash site) and also lingering within a dozen miles of base air space for 2-3 hours while in its slow backward stratospheric constant altitude phase and during descent.

While this was all happening, a B-17 chase plane was circling underneath and followed it all the way to to its crash point (16 miles due east of the base according to the Mogul plot).

from a comment by david rudiak below this blog post:

link

a reply to: Arbitrageur

If the latter they wouldn't want to draw any attention to it, and as you yourself said, they probably wouldn't give it a lot of attention.

Then why make the first announcement? The base commander where Mogul is based, no less.

The announcement did come from the base, not the rancher. Back to square one. If they are trying to hide some activity in the desert you announce a plane crash or some such, not a ufo.

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

They were dealing with more then just the US public. 1947 is the start of the Cold War. How do you fight a Cold War? Deception.

By not announcing anything. Not going hey we got a UFO here. The first announcement in the press saying "Army has disk" isn't very "deceptive".

It attracted world attention.

a reply to: intrptr

The first announcement in the press saying "Army has disk" isn't very "deceptive".

it was if they didn't have one

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

Lastly any guy that says he found a lot of little pieces of something and then describes it as "indestructible" ain't the sharpest tool in the tool shed.

On the other hand, any guy who didn't follow Marcel's logic wasn't the brightest crayon in the box either. It's not like he placed his hand on a bible and declared "I swear to god, no matter what happens, and even if you tape this piece of metal to a Hydrogen bomb and detonate it --> this stuff will never break." I mean come on. Marcel meant that it couldn't be broken by humans in conventional ways.



originally posted by: mirageman

Please give us some hard undeniable facts about this case to prove something not of this earth crashed then.

[regarding witnesses] Are we supposed to find them all ourselves? A few examples would be nice.

RE the Foster Ranch : Even if there was a gouge how do we know when it was made?

Again a link to source material directly referring to this gouge, or a picture before and after would add weight to your argument.

I've been straightforward in answering all of your questions thus far, and I politely request that you respond to mine before I proceed in answering these (above). See the top of page 7. Thanks.



originally posted by: intrptr

By far the most qualified to declare or debunk something as "ordinary" would be Marcel himself.

Absolutely agree with you here. Questioning Marcel's ability to identify Mogul material vs anything else is completely absurd. This is like saying a secretary doesn't have the skill-set to identify paper. If he were the ONLY witness to Roswell, logical people would (and should) still teeter on the fence. But my god, his story is barely the start.



originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

If you're going to take that angle, you have to remember this was during a particularly violent thunderstorm, as stated by Brazel, with strong winds and heavy rain. It wouldn't take much for balloons and it's payload to be dragged onto ground by the winds and leave gouges in the layer of wet sand. That's only logical and consistent with the wind-blown debris field being fanned out as well. This wasn't a "crash" by an object in clear, dry conditions skipping straight onto hardpan leaving a deep trench in the ground. In that case, you might have a valid argument.

I like your theory and it's the first time someone's brought it to my attention. After consideration, I need to say that for me the importance of the gouge isn't that it couldn't be made by a downed balloon in such conditions (above) but that it's more consistent with a craft travelling at mind-bending speeds touching off the desert floor for just a brief moment. Note that Marcel noticed the trench/gouge (not a drag mark, a trench -- in other words of noticeable depth) was much wider at the initial touch-point and tapered out over the distance. I just can't visualize a trench of these specifications getting formed by winds dragging along a balloon and components. Can you? I think a forensic investigator would agree that it's much more consistent with a fast-moving craft/object than a balloon dragging material in the wind.

I want to make it clear that I don't need a flying saucer to be the explanation, it's just that everything else is apparently not the explanation.



originally posted by: Willtell

100% consistent with our own construction methods of RADAR targets of that exact era. What an astronomical coincidence!
Foil-like Material - CHECK
Small Lightweight Beams - CHECK
Pieces No Larger Than 4 Feet - CHECK
Was there a single foreign piece of this alien spacecraft debris that can't be related to our own Earthly RADAR style payload construction? - NOPE
Amazing.

I bet every witness to Roswell turned over in their grave when you decided to click the post button. You sir have committed one of the greatest sins of the spoken word, the Strawman logical fallacy - misrepresenting another's argument to make it easier to attack. When you used the words "100% consistent" did you truly believe that your list of items was comprehensive (and correct in good faith) and fairly atching descriptions given by the majority of witnesses?



originally posted by: The GUT

Not exactly sourced that, especially in light of Bessie's sworn affidavits. So, it's "Schmidt said," or is there documentation?

I can't answer the question properly because I haven't been through all of his material, but he is in many people's opinion the gold standard of researcher so of course he'd have some kind of record apart from just making a comment on a video, which is what I saw. If you discovered that it was impeccably documented (which in effect invalidates your greatest anti-Roswell piece - Bessie's affidavit) can you honestly say that it would sway your opinion -- or would you just scramble for another thing to latch onto? Honestly though?

a reply to: intrptr

By not announcing anything. Not going hey we got a UFO here. The first announcement in the press saying "Army has disk" isn't very "deceptive".

It attracted world attention.

I agree which leads me to believe that the first announcement was an attempt at deception or wasn't well thought out or something along those lines. Like this post. I'm thinking along the lines of a blunder that turned out to work in their favor over time. That's just my feeling right now.

a reply to: HumanOnEarth

I am still interested in those death bed confessions. When was the earliest description of the "beings" that were seen. Were they first described in 1947 or sometime after 1961?

a reply to: HumanOnEarth

originally posted by: mirageman

I've been straightforward in answering all of your questions thus far, and I politely request that you respond to mine before I proceed in answering these (above). See the top of page 7. Thanks.

I did address those points here : www.abovetopsecret.com...


But in the sense of fair play, then I will address them again even though it seems to be mainly a list of statements.

Marcel at no point was involved with retrieval of bodies. And about the material ==> you're confusing official reports that he was forced to make with actual statements he made

Although this isn't a question as such I will have to answer it with one.

Do you not think the base intelligence officer would be 'gathering intelligence' and know about the retrieval of any alien bodies, autopsies etc?

Is it not strange that he never mentioned any alien bodies in his statements 30 years later but was quite happy to declare he'd handled something from outer space?

Nor has Jesse Marcel Jr. ever mentioned his father talking about aliens.

Of course it is possible that the retrieval of bodies was kept secret from the base intelligence officer. Just as the design and release of top secret Mogul balloons from Alamogordo were kept secret from the military personnel at Roswell AAF.

Thanks for making this argument and building my case. You're cherry-picking things to match your side and conveniently skirting around the hard facts

Again I'm faced with a statement and would require the hard facts I have asked you to provide to respond.

Witnesses at the time (including Brazel and his son) reported seeing a trench/gouge. That must have been one seriously hefty balloon.

Or it could have been caused by the lightning in the violent thunderstorms?

Marcel Sr., Cavitt, Bessie and Mack Brazel all appear to have conflicting information that there was a gouge

Brazel related that on June 14 he and 8-year-old son, Vernon were about 7 or 8 miles from the ranch house of the J.B. Foster ranch, which he operates, when they came upon a large area of bright wreckage made up on (sic) rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks.


This was an alleged statement made by Brazel (not in his own words) AFTER he was threatened, detained and paid off. The guy may have been a hard-headed cowboy, but he wasn't stupid enough to get killed over it. I'm going to paraphrase this, but at the time his family noted that he became a changed man, and took them aside and told them "People are going to start telling some huge lies about me, and none of it is true. I know what I saw."

Where are your sources?

Here is the contemporary information.

Brazel was brought here late yesterday by W.E. Whitmore, of radio station KGFL, had his picture taken and gave an interview to the Record and Jason Kellahin, sent here from the Albuquerque bureau of the Associated Press to cover the story.

The picture he posed for was sent out over the AP telephoto wire sending machine specially set up in the Record office by R. D. Adair, AP wire chief sent here for the sole purpose of getting out the picture and that of sheriff George Wilcox, to whom Brazel originally gave the information of his find. Brazel related that on June 14 he and 8-year-old son, Vernon were about 7 or 8 miles from the ranch house of the J.B. Foster ranch, which he operates, when they came upon a large area of bright wreckage made up on rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks.

Brazel said that he did not see it fall from the sky and did not see it before it was torn up, so he did not know the size or shape it might have been, but he thought it might have been about as large as a table top. The balloon which held it up, if that was how it worked, must have been about 12 feet long, he felt, measuring the distance by the size of the room in which he sat. The rubber was smoky gray in color and scattered over an area about 200 yards in diameter.

When the debris was gathered up the tinfoil, paper, tape, and sticks made a bundle about three feet long and 7 or 8 inches thick, while the rubber made a bundle about 18 or 20 inches long and about 8 inches thick. In all, he estimated, the entire lot would have weighed maybe five pounds.............

There was no sign of any metal in the area which might have been used for an engine and no sign of any propellers of any kind, although at least one paper fin had been glued onto some of the tinfoil.....................

Brazel said that he had previously found two weather balloons on the ranch, but that what he found this time did not in any way resemble either of these.




Source : Roswell Files

So there you have it. Brazel admittedly did not think it was a weather balloon.

But then again neither did these folks



Full story : Page 2 of this thread

Right, that's what I implied by "we." My point is that even after the Pro-Roswell side stopped toting Kaughman as a source, the anti-Roswell crew bizarrely kept on including him in their bag of munition.

Again this yet another statement. I never mentioned Kaufman until you brought him up.

So how many was it then [regarding many of military personnel, in their 80s and 90s, admitted seeing dead aliens and/or material not from this world]?

Enough to make you uncomfortable. Why would so many of them all start telling the same lie, even to their family just hours before their death?

Well assuming there is more than one I could say that they were both co-erced in some ways, perhaps bribed, maybe wanted attention or were simply losing their wits. The onus however lies on you to cite your sources and provide names and their claims.

Ok so according to the wiki a 1991 discovery of carbon-nanotubes is a common misconception, and it was actually in 1952. Is that before 1947 or after 1947?

It is 5 years after. But not 44 years after and they existed before 1947.

How do we know citizens were threatened for talking.

Many were. Here's one on video... youtu.be... and plenty more here: www.aliens-everything-you-want-to-know.com...

Glenn Dennis, unreliable witness. Kevin Randle says so

Inez Wilcox - This is hearsay testimony from her granddaughter Barbara Drugger.

Frankie Rowe - 2nd hand witness too. No evidence from log books that her father's fire crew venturing out beyond their jurisdiction of Roswell ciy limits in July of 1947.

Can't remember the stories from the others .

But a sizeable military unit would be needed to have been despatched to Roswell AAF to not only guard the nuclear weapons on base due to the new threat, but also clean up the two (three?) crash sites, police the regular troops to make sure not even the smallest piece of evidence was taken as a souvenir. Then also research who may have seen/heard something and then go around threatening civilians.



continued below >>>>