THE CASE FOR ROSWELL PART II.
The Debris Analysis
(For Part I of this series of posts, please see www.abovetopsecret.com...
Again, apologizing for the length, but hopefully, you’ll find it worthwhile to read…
We’ve already seen (in Part I) a lot of evidence to show that whatever crashed at Roswell, it was not some amalgamation of Project Mogul and Project
High Dive. Of course, many skeptics still maintain that the debris recovered is that of Mogul targets and balloons. So, we’ll examine this
We’ll start with the most sensational…the “I-Beams” as they are called. The skeptics claim that these sticks are the balsa wood framework of
the Mogul radar targets. Of course, anyone who’s ever held a piece of balsa wood, knows that even a small child could break it between two fingers
without effort, so how does this compare to the witness descriptions?
(F&B, interviewed July, 1990) "The piece he [Mac Brazel] brought looked like a kind of tan, light brown plastic. It was very lightweight,
like balsa wood. It wasn't a large piece, maybe about four inches long, maybe just a little larger than a pencil. We cut on it with a knife and
would hold a match on it, and it wouldn't burn. We knew it wasn't wood. It was smooth like plastic, it didn't have a real sharp corners, kind
of like a dowel stick. Kind of dark tan. It didn't have any grain, just smooth. I hadn't seen anything like it."-Loretta
So, it is easy to see the balsa wood connection. But, if this was the balsa wood debris from a Mogul balloon, surely a piece the size mentioned could
be broken, cut, or burned very easily, even by a child.
(B&M; interview Dec. 1979) "There were several different types of stuff. ...it sure was light in weight. It weighed almost nothing. There
was some wooden-like particles I picked up. These were like balsa wood in weight, but a bit darker in color and much harder. You know the thing
about wood is that the harder it gets, the heavier it is. Mahogany, for example is quite heavy. This stuff, on the other hand, weighed nothing,
yet you couldn't scratch it with your fingernail like ordinary balsa, and you couldn't break it either. It was pliable, but wouldn't break.
Of course, all I had was a few splinters. It never occurred to me to try to burn it so I don't know if it would burn or not."
[Quoting his father] "Dad did say one time that there were what he called 'figures' on some of the pieces he found. He often referred to
the petroglyphs the ancient Indians drew on rocks around here as "figures" too, and I think that's what he meant to compare them with."-William
Again, we see that the material could not be cut. He states his father (Mac Brazel) who initially found the debris, saw pieces with some symbols on
(F&B) "A lot of it had a lot of little members [beams] with symbols that we had to call them hieroglyphics because I could not interpret
them, they could not be read, they were just symbols, something that meant something and they were not all the same. The members that this was
painted on -- by the way, those symbols were pink and purple, lavender was actually what it was. And so these little members could not be broken,
could not be burned. I even tried to burn that. It would not burn."-Major Jesse Marcel
He drew the glyphs he saw…and they were on an “I-shaped” beam, which is VERY different than the framework for the Mogul targets (or any other
such radar target). Marcel’s description…
Yet the skeptics claim this was balsa wood, with colored tape (stating that they got the tape from a toy company, and it had flowers printed on it).
Such as Mogul engineer Charles Moore’s description...
However, this is not what Marcel and the others describe at all. Even you or I could easily tell tin foil taped to a piece of balsa wood, from
something extraordinary. Moreover, the explanations offered fail to explain how the debris pieces couldn’t be cut or burned.
Bessie Brazel is often cited by the skeptics, as she has mentioned seeing “tape”. However, that is not really what she said…
"There were what appeared to be pieces of heavily waxed paper and a sort of aluminum-like foil. Some of these pieces had something like
numbers and lettering on them, but there were no words you were able to make out. Some of the metal-foil pieces had a sort of tape stuck to them, and
when these were held to the light they showed what looked like pastel flowers or designs. Even though the stuff looked like tape it could not be
peeled off or removed at all…. [The writing] looked like numbers mostly ... They were written out like you would write numbers in columns to do an
addition problem. But they didn't look like the numbers we use at all. What gave me the idea they were numbers, I guess, was the way they were
all ranged out in columns… No, it was definitely not a balloon. We had seen weather balloons quite a lot - both on the ground and in the air.
We had even found a couple of Japanese-style balloons that had come down in the area once. We had also picked up a couple of those thin rubber weather
balloons with instrument packages. This was nothing like that. I have never seen anything resembling this sort of thing before - or
since..."-Crash at Corona-Friedman
A recent Disclosure Project witness, Brig. General Steven Lovekin, describing what he was shown during a Pentagon briefing around 1959. He also has
signed a sworn affidavit to this testimony. I suppose this was also balsa wood sticks?
(During a Pentagon meeting discussing Project Blue Book materials)
"Colonel Hollobard [sp? perhaps Hollogard] brought out a piece of what appeared to be metallic -- it was a metallic piece of -- it looked like a
yardstick. It had deciphering--it had encryption on it. He did describe them as being symbols of instruction. And that's as far as he would go.
But he did infer that the instructions, whatever they might have been, were something that was important enough for the military to keep working on
on a constant basis.
"It seemed giant-like when I saw it because it was the first time I had ever seen anything like this before. And all eyes were just peeled on that
particular thing. And when he told us what it was, it was frightening, it was eerie there. You could have heard a pin drop in the room when it was
"He said it had been taken from one of the craft that had crashed in New Mexico. It had been taken from a box of materials that the military
was working on. They didn't use the word reverse engineering at that time, but it was something similar to the reverse engineering they felt like
they needed to work on and that it was going to take years to do this."
There are additional witnesses, but I think this serves the purpose, of showing that these pieces of debris were something special and not balsa
sticks. The additional witnesses concur with the pieces being shaped like an I-beam, and not at all like the framework described by the Mogul
engineer Moore. Repeatedly, the witnesses are impressed that the debris pieces could not be broken, cut, or burned. And yet we’re to believe that
all of these people were fooled by balsa wood? Even a Brig. General and the senior intelligence officer of the Roswell Army Air Field? I don’t buy
Now we turn to the metallic foil debris. Foil was used for the Mogul targets, but it was “off the shelf” material, even as mentioned by Moore.
Aluminum foil is hardly fantastic or non-recognizable, even to the public in 1947. Indeed, even children are familiar with it as the wrapping of a
Hershey’s chocolate bar (as another member pointed out). Well, like the balsa wood, tin foil is also extremely fragile. How does this compare to
the debris described?
(H&M, FUFOR, 1979 television interview) "[There were] many bits of metallic foil, that looked like, but was not, aluminum, for no matter
how often one crumpled it, it regained its original shape again. Besides that, they were indestructible, even with a sledgehammer."-Major
That must be some extra heavy duty tin foil the Army was using! And memory metals, in 1947? Yet Mogul is stated (even by skeptics) as using off the
shelf materials, as the only thing classified about Mogul was it’s mission objectives…not its components. And yet somehow, this was so sensitive
as to require it to be classified for almost half a century? Surely, this flies in the face of common sense. Let’s look at other witnesses’
descriptions of the foil-like debris.
(F&B) "One of the pieces looked like] something on the order of tinfoil, except that [it] wouldn't tear.... You could wrinkle it and lay
it back down and it immediately resumed its original shape... quite pliable, but you couldn't crease or bend it like ordinary metal. Almost like a
plastic, but definitely metallic. Dad once said that the Army had once told him it was not anything made by us."
"...a little piece of -- it wasn't tinfoil, it wasn't lead foil -- a piece about the size of my finger. ...The only reason I noticed the tinfoil
(I'm gonna call it tinfoil), I picked this stuff up and put it in my chaps pocket. Might be two or three days or a week before I took it out and put
it in a cigar box. I happened to notice when I put that piece of foil in that box, and the damn thing just started unfolding and just flattened
out. Then I got to playing with it. I'd fold it, crease it, lay it down and it'd unfold. It's kinda weird. I couldn't tear it. The
color was in between tinfoil and lead foil, about the [thickness] of lead foil."-Mac Brazel
(Pflock, FUFOR, from affidavit 9/27/93): "What Bill [Brazel Jr.] showed us was a piece of what I still think as fabric. It was something
like aluminum foil, something like satin, something like well-tanned leather in its toughness, yet was not precisely like any one of those materials.
While I do not recall this with certainty, I think the fabric measured about four by eight to ten inches. Its edges, where were smooth, were not
exactly parallel, and its shape was roughly trapezoidal. It was about the thickness of a very fine kidskin glove leather and a dull metallic grayish
silver, one side slightly darker than the other. I do not remember it having any design or embossing on it. Bill passed it around, and we all felt
it. I did a lot of sewing, so the feel made a great impression on me. It felt like no fabric I have touched before or since. It was very
silky or satiny, with the same texture on both sides. Yet when I crumpled it in my hands, the feel was like that you notice when you crumple a
leather glove in your hand. When it was released, it sprang back into its original shape, quickly flattening out with no wrinkles. I did this
several times, as did the others. I remember some of the others stretching it between their hands and "popping" it, but I do not think anyone tried
to cut or tear it."-Sally Strickland Tadolini (neighbor) in a sworn affadavit
(Pflock, FUFOR, affidavit 10/10/91) "All I saw was a little piece of material. The piece of debris I saw was two-to-three inches square. It
was jagged. When you crumpled it up, it then laid back out; and when it did, it kind of crackled, making a sound like cellophane, and it crackled
when it was let out. There were no creases.”-Sgt. Robert Smith (member of the First Air Transport Unit, which operated Douglas C-54 Skymaster
four-engine cargo planes out of the Roswell AAF) in a sworn affidavit.
Ok, so that’s what the witnesses describe (there are others of course, attesting to the same properties, but I believe this is sufficient for now),
how does it compare to the foil used in Mogul? Here’s Warrant Officer Irving Newton’s description of the foil used in Mogul. Newton was the
weather officer called in to identify the debris at Ramey’s press conference on July 8, 1947. (Note: Major Marcel and Chief of Staff Dubose contend
that the balloon debris photographed was a coverup, as stated in Dubose’s affidavit). The interviewer is in italics, whereas the answers by Newton
are in regular text.
(B&M, questioning Newton in July 1979 Interview)
Q. But wouldn't the people at Roswell have been able to identify a balloon on their own?
A. They certainly should have. It was a regular Rawin sonde. They must have seen hundreds of them.
Q. Can you describe the fabric? Was it easy to tear?
A. Certainly. You would have to be careful not to tear it. The metal involved was like an extremely thin Alcoa wrap. It was very
So, while we do have material resembling tin foil and balsa wood, unlike those materials, the ones found in wreckage had memory metal qualities,
wouldn’t burn or tear, and the beams couldn’t be broken but were flexible, completely unlike tin foil and balsa wood. So, either all of these
(and those not mentioned here) people are lying (and in sworn affidavits), or the material found was certainly not tin foil and balsa wood.
In addition to the wreckage that crumpled and would bounce back though, are other pieces of debris that couldn’t be bent, marked, burned, etc.
These pieces of debris were some of the larger pieces and are described below.
"This particular piece of metal was, I would say, about two feet long and perhaps a foot wide. See, that stuff weighs nothing, it's
so thin, it isn't any thicker than the tinfoil in a pack of cigarettes. So I tried to bend the stuff, it wouldn't bend. We even tried making a
dent in it with a 16-pound sledge hammer, and there was still no dent in it. I didn't have the time to go out there and find out more about it,
because I had so much other work to do that I just let it go. It's still a mystery to me as to what the whole thing was. Like I said before, I knew
quite a bit about the material used in the air, but it was nothing I had seen before. And as of now, I still don't know what it was.”-Major
Marcel in an interview with Leonard Stringfield
(R&S1) One man set a piece on the ground and jumped on it, trying to dent or bend it, and failed.
"There was a slightly curved piece of metal, real light. It was about six inches by twelve or fourteen inches. Very light. I crouched down
and tried to snap it. My boss [Cavitt] laughs and said, 'Smart guy. He's trying to do what we couldn't do.' I asked, 'what in the hell is this
stuff made out of?' It didn't feel like plastic and I never saw a piece of metal this thin that you couldn't break."
"This was the strangest material we had ever seen ... there was talk about it not being from Earth. ...A year later I was talking to Joe Wirth, a
CIC officer from Andrews Air Force Base in Washington D.C. I asked what they had found out about the stuff from Roswell. He told me that they still
didn't know what it was and that their metal experts still couldn't cut it."-M. Sgt. Lewis (Bill) Rickett (Prior to going into
counterintelligence, Rickett was a highly qualified aircraft mechanic, inspector, and supervisor. During the war, he was sent to Europe as part of
the team that studied German aircraft on site. Thus he was well-qualified in his assessment of the strange thin-metal he said he saw )
It appears that the skeptics are being selective in which pieces of debris they cite and compare to Mogul. Surely, none of the recently mentioned
debris (such as unbendable metal sheets two feet long) is comparable to any materials used in Mogul, and indeed, seem to be beyond our capability at
the time, and possibly even now, to produce. Oddly enough though, perhaps the greatest clue of all that this wasn’t balloon debris, is provided by
the military itself… Would they really fly balsa wood and tin foil to Wright Field or Fort Worth for analysis? Surely even the base janitor could
easily identify the materials if this is indeed what it was, so why all the secrecy? The Mogul balloons weren’t using any kind of top secret gear,
only it’s mission objectives were classified. Why would tin foil and balsa wood be flown out at all, let alone in secrecy and urgency? It simply
doesn’t make sense…unless of course, you then recall the words of Brig. General Steven Lovekin (as previously mentioned in his affidavit during a
"It seemed giant-like when I saw it because it was the first time I had ever seen anything like this before. And all eyes were just peeled
on that particular thing. And when he told us what it was, it was frightening, it was eerie there. You could have heard a pin drop in the room when
it was first mentioned.”
Somehow, I don’t think it was tin foil and balsa wood that had the men frightened and humbled…
In Part III, I’ll go into the timeline of events leading up to, during, and soon after the crash, based of course, on factual evidence as well as
testimony. It will likely be the longest in the series of posts, and it may be a few days before I get it completed and posted. I felt it was
important to address both the incompetent Air Force conclusions, as well as the ridiculousness of the Mogul/High Dive explanations before delving into
the detail of events as they occurred. Next though, we get to the good stuff…
[TO BE CONTINUED]
Part III, Section A can be seen here: www.abovetopsecret.com...
[edit on 26-5-2005 by Gazrok]