The Roswell Deception

a reply to: scrounger

So can we just establish where you stand by spelling it out?

- You didn't read the book?
- You believe Roswell was an alien event? So you won't be reading the book.

PS - Witness testimony would have to be 'admissible' and also prove a crime was committed as an established fact in any court of law. If you say there has been a murder then we would need to at least establish someone has been killed beyond reasonable doubt. If Roswell was aliens then where is the evidence beyond reasonable doubt for the existence of aliens? How would anyone even know what an alien looked like?

Haven't read Carrion's book yet but I know I am not going to agree to the general premise as the logic doesn't hold true as an intelligence operation. Seeding a mystery that is causing you just as many headaches to understand is not a great strategy.

Something unusual was flying in American skies that summer - aside from Arnolds sighting and the myriad reports you have the Weaver pics (Michigan) and Rhodes pics (Arizona) both from July 7th, 1947.

What Brazel came across was almost definitely not the wreckage of whatever is in those pics but maybe that was what was found at the fabled second landing site - found as a result of a search instigated following Brazel's report. That would provide an explanation for the subsequent weather balloon circus and potentially tie in all the anecdotal stuff which mistakenly gets mixed in with the Brazel find.

Total conjecture of course but interesting pics none the less !

originally posted by: Jay-morris
This very well could be true about the Roswell deception. But there is a pattern here. First government said it was a weather balloon. Skeptics agree, no questions ask. Then it was project mogul. Same people agree, no questions asked. And if the government said it was all a deception to deceive Russia, the same people will agree, no questions asked. Can you see the pattern here? It's all to do with belief on both sides, and that's the problem with this subject as a whole

And it is getting in the way of serious ufo investigations.

Not quite.

This book is by a former director of MUFON. It has nothing to do with any official government explanations.
So should be treated as any other book by a private individual.

I also don't think there will be agreement from either side of the fence on its assertions. I would say that the evidence presented builds a good case. But ultimately the evidence is circumstantial. However I do agree that there is no substantial evidence for aliens being involved at Roswell beyond the anecdotal. Much of it is 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand anyway and the same tired arguments but little in the way of proof.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: scrounger

So can we just establish where you stand by spelling it out?

- You didn't read the book?
- You believe Roswell was an alien event? So you won't be reading the book.

PS - Witness testimony would have to be 'admissible' and also prove a crime was committed as an established fact in any court of law. If you say there has been a murder then we would need to at least establish someone has been killed beyond reasonable doubt. If Roswell was aliens then where is the evidence beyond reasonable doubt for the existence of aliens? How would anyone even know what an alien looked like?

But you have to ask yourself, why every time the government comes out with an explanation for Roswell, it is believed by the same group of people, no questions ask.

They say weather balloon - it was a weather balloon

They say project mogul - it was project mogul

They say it was a deception to deceive Russia, it was deception.

Again, you see the pattern here?

originally posted by: mirageman

originally posted by: Jay-morris
This very well could be true about the Roswell deception. But there is a pattern here. First government said it was a weather balloon. Skeptics agree, no questions ask. Then it was project mogul. Same people agree, no questions asked. And if the government said it was all a deception to deceive Russia, the same people will agree, no questions asked. Can you see the pattern here? It's all to do with belief on both sides, and that's the problem with this subject as a whole

And it is getting in the way of serious ufo investigations.

Not quite.

This book is by a former director of MUFON. It has nothing to do with any official government explanations.
So should be treated as any other book by a private individual.

I also don't think there will be agreement from either side of the fence on its assertions. I would say that the evidence presented builds a good case. But ultimately the evidence is circumstantial. However I do agree that there is no substantial evidence for aliens being involved at Roswell beyond the anecdotal. Much of it is 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand anyway and the same tired arguments but little in the way of proof.

Yrs, but it goes against the ET theory, just like the government's silly explanations, but people still believed those explanations, no question asked.

You are right, there is no real evidence that this was ET, but I do fell we are not being told the truth about Roswell.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: scrounger

So can we just establish where you stand by spelling it out?

seems you are one of an elite few that wont grasp what I "am spelling out"
which is the governments case that its "case closed" not a possibility its extraterrestrial.
a case they make with little to no hard evidence , changed stories, and alot of facts disproven.

- You didn't read the book?

did you read "case closed " report ?
did you look at the proven facts of records not being there, changed testimony, and other sources ?

just rely on one source of this book

- You believe Roswell was an alien event? So you won't be reading the book.

I have read most of what has come before it, along with other secret projects that were openly published.
my views come from MULTIPLE sources including "official" government reports then used LOGIC .

I AGAIN say that I dont know if it was DEFINITELY alien but due to what I previously stated the idea it absolutely possessively cannot be alien has NOT BEEN PROVEN.

PS - Witness testimony would have to be 'admissible' and also prove a crime was committed as an established fact in any court of law. If you say there has been a murder then we would need to at least establish someone has been killed beyond reasonable doubt. If Roswell was aliens then where is the evidence beyond reasonable doubt for the existence of aliens? How would anyone even know what an alien looked like?

WITNESS testimony does not have nor just considered valid if used in criminal court cases.
it is used to report/confirm historical events, scientific events, accidents, ect.
I just pointed out that IF ufo (in general) and roswell (in specific) testimony WAS AS CREDIBLE as what is USED in criminal cases.
that if you use SAME CRITERIA from criminal cases (credibility, facts given, person standing , ect) they stand up in alot (but not all ) cases.
case in point is marcel who had SECURITY CLEARANCE and decorations from the military. Was stationed at the most secret (at the time) highly classified base and no blemishes on his record .
who had EXPERT credentials in aircraft knowledge and access to the most sensitive programs at the time.

in short you keep bringing up this ONE BOOK that basically states (I did look into some of it) the same story told by the government.

the same story that has changed multiple times.

the book does not give anymore direct info on what crashed there. just excuses why the military covers up things for secrecy.

BTW exactly where in the book does it give specs, pics, details and date/time of missions of project mogul and correlate/confirm it was that... or exactly what it was?

scrounger

ufomedia.blogspot.com...

a reply to: scrounger

So you think it was aliens then?

....in short you keep bringing up this ONE BOOK that basically states (I did look into some of it) the same story told by the government.

I keep bringing up the book because that is what the thread is about!!!

My impression was that it tells a story about the US and Aliied governments trying to deceive the Soviet Union. Roswell formed part of that deception. Not something I've heard come from the United States Air Force or Government before. But you seem to be confusing the book as being an official report. Which it is not.

BTW exactly where in the book does it give specs, pics, details and date/time of missions of project mogul and correlate/confirm it was that... or exactly what it was?

I am not sure why it would provide such details. But feel free to search throughout yourself if its important to you.

The book certainly digs up some interesting historical facts from the time period. Certainly shows that games were being played to deceive the Soviets. But to me it hasn't shown beyond doubt that Roswell was simply a small part of a grand deception plan.

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
ufomedia.blogspot.com...

Does this mean you agree that he was right about Stan Romanek all along? And Bigelow too for not sharing information and peeinf all over MUFON?

a reply to: mirageman

I was just reading it MM there is so much goo out there. I have zero time for con man Stan. So wont get started. My point, so much is said in general.

How about this one by Nick Redfern.

mysteriousuniverse.org...

I suppose it has something in common with the RFI case ? Or at least Jims part. But then we have the late Georgina Bruni with an interesting quote re the "UFOnaughts" mixed in the bag.

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
a reply to: BlackProject

en.wikipedia.org...

Ok that one not so much but does not mean the rest all dated before the Roswell incident is not clear signs that UFO's have been seen for many years before planes were invented and such 'new' sightings became the thing it is now.

a reply to: BlackProject

I know you are just talking about Roswell incident here but you are in some sense putting the idea out there that this may be the reason for all UFO sightings. If you are not, then ok

I said in the OP.

Carrion is not saying there aren’t genuine mysteries in our skies. That is not his argument. But he believes Roswell was part of a much larger deception operation which also fooled the press, media, politicians and public which led to a decision that the operation would never be revealed.

The book concentrates on a specific time period and is referring specifically to Roswell, Kenneth Arnold's sightings and his Maury Island mystery and a number of other incidents in 1947 if that clarifies it?

... but does not mean the rest all dated before the Roswell incident is not clear signs that UFO's have been seen for many years before planes were invented and such 'new' sightings became the thing it is now.

There were mysteries in our skies long before and that occurred long after Roswell. The problem with many 'researchers' is the attempt to preserve every UFO story as a mystery and their hidden motivations for doing so.

Why, for instance, does Roswell have to remain on top of the pile of cases considered ' best evidence for aliens coming to Earth? No one added them into the case until the 1980s. Yet a case like the Kelly Hopkinsville Case remains virtually untouched since 1955. Here a UFO was reported coming to Earth and 'goblin-like' creatures were reported attacking a family.

a reply to: mirageman

Most in this thread won't..but I am going to refrain from commenting further until I have read the book.

As long as people approach thr book objectively and leave thier conformation bias at the door we could be in for a good discussion.

a reply to: mirageman

ok lets try a fourth attempt / wording on this

roswell is claimed by some to be an alien craft crash with POSSIBLY (another factor but if not true does not change the first) alien bodies that the government has covered up.

the government has claimed it is not alien but 1. nothing, 2. weather balloon, 3. project mogul, 4. deception to the soviets (also claim of your book), along with EVERY ATTEMPT riddled with proven falsehoods, non backed up claims, and to date NO PROOF provided what it was.

your book just claims that the government engaged in mis information to portray things to the soviets that were not true.

but here is where your logic of using JUST THIS BOOK falls apart on the roswell incident.

ANYTHING that the government was trying to hide or portray after 70 YEARS is technologically and national secret protecting IRRELEVANT.

as I gave a CLEAR EXAMPLE the U2 spyplane came out in 1955 (7 years after roswell if your counting) and by 1996 (a few years before but this I can give clear evidence) just one book (of many) by ben richards "the skunk works" listed the U2, how its made, the payload it carried, the missions it flew, the pilots it had . In short EVERYTHING and that was 28 YEARS after it came out...

if keeping count its now 70 years and roswell still no fact information given.

in simple there is literally NOTHING to protect now or even (given the facts of other more secret projects I listed before) by the time of the 1997 "case closed" report.

hence the continued controversy since the government has to date not come clean on EXACTLY what it was that was found in roswell.

the evidence presented (along with the governments bad reports) highly indicates it was not a weather balloon or project mogul.

so WHAT IS IT?

its up to those trying to claim (as the book does) it could never be alien in nature but REFUSES TO PROOF what it was.

sorry but there is enough evidence that it could (didnt say definitely it was ) alien in nature from reputable witnesses to include MAJOR MARCEL who was proven to be there. A man TO DATE (one of many btw) with NO REASON to lie after his service was up.

your book does provide a REASON why at the time it logically could be covered up....

but UNLESS YOU PROVE WHAT IT WAS then it is just another theory and in this case just a reason why.

given that the government (and this author) claims it isnt alien, then WHAT WAS IT?

sorry "its not alien, case closed because we say so " doesnt cut it.

lastly as I stated I DONT KNOW IF IT WAS ALIEN IN NATURE... but given the presented evidence I (unlike you and others) will not discount this possibility since WE STILL DONT HAVE PROOF what crashed.

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

Very good logic...People have to accept uncertainty until certainty is clear. Until then any theory is as possible as the next

a reply to: mirageman

Leftover Naaaaaziiiis...
Pretennnnding
.. to be Aliens...

Leftover NOTTT - SEENS...
Pre-heee, tending to beat Themmmmm...

a reply to: scrounger

Enough of this... You're spreading false information and making it obvious you haven't read the Roswell Report at all. I don't know where your addendums are coming from, but the explanation of the "alien spacecraft" crash IS in the 1994 report. It makes me question your motive or maybe it's simply a lack of ability to focus because of the 993 pages. You're also confusing the two reports.

You keep repeating that the Air Force/government is hiding or trying to backpedal and fill in the holes of the story. READ THE REPORT because you're only making yourself look like an ill-informed blind believer. In MY THREAD I have the explanation of a simple in between service/research/experimental flight crashing on the Foster ranch. I provided the schematics, dates, documentation, and so forth you claim are missing. These are screen grabs and quotes directly from the Roswell Report. Technical drawings and descriptions of the in between flights are shown, the timing of the launch of a "regular sono bouy up in a cluster of balloons" on June 4th is shown, the distance of the launch 80 miles to the southwest of the Foster ranch in Alamogordo is shown, correspondence with the Air Coordinating Committee stating that other balloon flights from Alamogordo were descending in the area of Roswell, NM is shown, the July 14, 1947 news article from Mac Brazel describing debris found made up of rubber strips, foil, tough paper, and sticks is shown- debris that coincidentally match both this "spaceship" and balloon and radar targets. The construction materials, with a blueprint of a radar target, is also shown. Again, all facts supported in the Roswell Report.

If you have anything constructive to say or want to challenge me after reading the facts I provide first, do so in my thread please so I'm not hijacking miragemans. But stop being frantic and repeatedly spreading this false delusion.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

one I have read most of it
along with it is one of the most quoted in the history of government attempts at denial.

but in all your ranting and accusing me of a true believer you left out one CLEAR CONCISE FACT i have repeated over and over.

I DONT KNOW WHAT CRASHED IN ROSWELL
I DONT KNOW IF IT WAS ALIEN OR NOT.
I SAY GIVEN THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY CREDIBLE WITNESSES (like major marcel) , the governments "explanations" that have more holes than swiss cheese, and the KNOWN FACT there has been ZERO PROOF TO ACTUALLY WHAT CRASHED AT ROSWELL ....
that alien spacecraft MAY (listen closely) MAY be a possibility.

Untill we have PROOF you cannot say that it isnt

if being open to other theories due to LACK OF HARD FACTS TO WHAT IT WAS is a "true believer"

you really need to use a dictionary to help you define POSSIBILITY.

but for sake of argument and fairness.

what PROOF DO YOU HAVE to CONFIRM WHAT IT WAS?

Im waiting

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

Perhaps establishing some facts will make this conversation more productive:

1. It has never been conclusively established that something "crashed" at Roswell, only that something was recovered. There is no contemporaneously recorded evidence from 1947 that shows something was seen flying and crashing.

2. There is zero contemporaneous evidence from any of the principles including Jesse Marcel that memorialized at the time the events surrounding Roswell. Contemporaneous as in a diary recorded in 1947 or soon after, a newspaper interview from 1947 or soon after, etc.

3. A "credible" witness does not equate to a "truthful" witness as memories and events can become distorted with time. For example, let's take any of the pilots who claimed to have transported the Roswell debris in 1947. The Roswell AAFB transport unit were known as the Green Hornets and they transported Top Secret material all the time, for example, when transporting atomic bomb equipment and personnel from Operation Task Force 1.5 to Bikini Atoll. How would one of these pilots have remembered exactly which of their "Top Secret" flights was Roswell debris and which was just one of their routine Top Secret flights?

4. Witness testimony gathered decades after the fact is suspect. To be believable requires contemporaneously recorded evidence.


Regards,
James