It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Roswell Deception

page: 6
34
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Mr. Carrion, first, thanks for all your work in the field, I’ve seen you on some documentaries and respect greatly your input…I’m looking forward to reading the book.

Just one question. Maybe you dealt with this in the book.

Do you think the Roswell story reemerging into prominence after almost 40 years was part of the intelligence operation?

One might assume as such with Bill Moore being a part of that reemergence.




posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

I think that Roswell re-emerged by accident - starting with Stanton Friedman's interviews with Jessie Marcel Sr. I could be completely wrong but that is just my gut reaction. My reasoning is based on what surfaced soon after Roswell reemerged into the public zeitgeist - the MJ-12 documents.

Someone went through a whole lot of effort to send Ufologists down the MJ-12 rabbit hole. If Roswell was part and parcel of the original deception script as I hypothesize and support in my book, and if you are the custodian/inheritor of that deception and you don't want researchers sniffing around the deception motive, then change the story and send them off on a wild goose chase of a crashed alien spacecraft.

Bill Moore is an enigma to me...I would love to sit down one day with him and pick his brain..

Regards,
James



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: jamescarrion

Good reasoning...I agree the coincidences are somewhat unbelievable.

Bill Moore to me was just a guy who thought he could outsmart the masters of tricknology and got tricked himself



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Just another example of "trading up" ; people that think they can increase their knowledge by "real insiders / keepers of secrets" when in reality, they end up doing things for said people and get nothing in return.

I felt sorry for him to be honest, but fair play to him for having the balls to come out with it in the end though..... living in a trailer working as a high school janitor as the rumors go...

It would be interesting for someone to catch up with him and get his thoughts on all this madness all these years later..



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: jamescarrion

your book states CLEARLY a reason why the government would lie.
I also agree and gave an example why they would in the short term

what you book does provide is a THEORY as to what MAY have happened.


it DOES NOT provide CLEAR VERIFIABLE PROOF to what crashed.


so in essence you provide some evidence for A THEORY...

I again ask SPECIFICALLY WITH PROOF what crashed in roswell.


BTW unless you didn't read your last post about my comments your were arguing (and asked question twice BTW) what PROOF a crashed happened .


I provided it to you with DEFINITIONS of the words used in the report.


then you comment you claim I add nothing to the conversation along with a personal crack I just want to argue.


you got your answer and didn't like it


so again unless you can provide VERIFIABLE PROOF to what EXACTLY CRASHED at roswell then all your saying is a THEORY.


so no more possible than say an alien crash

pssst I said POSSIBLE NOT DID so save that comment..


Scrounger



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: scrounger

You don't need to keep repeating yourself...it is clear you believe something crashed at Roswell but can't offer contemporaneous proof to back up your belief... instead you keep harping on the 1994 Air Force's report which doesn't say anything crashed but just mentions wreckage...and somehow we are supposed to assume that wreckage was at one time airborne. Of course if it was a weather balloon, it was airborne at one time.

But there is no proof from 1947 that an alien spacecraft crashed or any aircraft for that matter crashed. Zero! Nada! and repeating yourself over and over isn't going to change that.

Still waiting for your 1947 proof....
edit on 29-12-2018 by jamescarrion because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: pigsy2400

Look nobody’s perfect but I remind folks that any government agent is paid, trained and is exhorted to deceive you and sometimes worst.

There is NEVER any good reason to do anything with the CIA or any other government secret organization, and grown-ups should know that.




It would be interesting for someone to catch up with him and get his thoughts on all this madness all these years later..


Somebody posted he was a janitor or something somewhere



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: scrounger

You've wasted post after post asking for "PROOF" while providing nothing to back up your own quote:

"There is solid evidence that it MAY (KEY WORD MAY) not be from this planet."

Go on and provide us with examples of this "solid evidence". This is a very simple to the point request.

edit on 29-12-2018 by Ectoplasm8 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Your own Roswell thread (that you linked to recently) was a masterclass in research and presentation, quite unlike anything I have seen before on ATS in terms of tackling and deeply penetrating the reality of available information in a case such as Roswell.

I had the pleasure of reading it this week for the first time, and the only quibble I have is that it didn't gain more flags than an average throwaway "What's this red dot in the sky, lol?" thread.

I salute you, sir.



posted on Dec, 30 2018 @ 08:41 AM
link   
For those unfamiliar with how and what the Soviets did in terms of intelligence and counterintelligence operations;
tinyurl.com...



posted on Dec, 30 2018 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: pigsy2400

Thanks for the link!



posted on Dec, 30 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Thank you. I appreciate the comment.

As you said, it dropped off to be out flagged by silly UFO/balloon type of threads. So much for the "Deny Ignorance" motto if nonsense mindless threads are what get attention. And so much for being challenged.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 03:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: jamescarrion
a reply to: scrounger

You don't need to keep repeating yourself...it is clear you believe something crashed at Roswell but can't offer contemporaneous proof to back up your belief... instead you keep harping on the 1994 Air Force's report which doesn't say anything crashed but just mentions wreckage...and somehow we are supposed to assume that wreckage was at one time airborne. Of course if it was a weather balloon, it was airborne at one time.

But there is no proof from 1947 that an alien spacecraft crashed or any aircraft for that matter crashed. Zero! Nada! and repeating yourself over and over isn't going to change that.

Still waiting for your 1947 proof....


I quoted you so we have (again) clearly what you said

you said the report didnt mention "crash" but there was wreckage.

I again CHALLENGE YOU to prove how wreckage just appears without a crash be mid air (wreckage falls from the sky) or with the ground.

I even provided WEBSTERS DICTIONARY definition of crash and wreckage .

but you harp the word "crash" didnt appear but all the PROVEN GOVERNMENT evidence said wreckage was there because of "the incident"

the government SPECIFICALLY STATED there was an incident that resulted in wreckage .

So on this point I DIRECTLY CHALLENGED YOU to provide PROOF how wreckage appeared but there was no crash

you just deflected and went on.

now on to your direct quote "But there is no proof from 1947 that an alien spacecraft crashed or any aircraft for that matter crashed".

then what was the wreckage that the government in all reports CLEARLY STATED WAS THERE.

Was it a plane, was it a balloon, was it an alien craft?

we DONT KNOW and have NO PROOF to say one way or the other.

you rant, rave, and have a book of reasons, theories, and a clear rant it isnt alien.

but you (and to be fair the government itself) have not provided PROOF WHAT IT WAS.

just because someone dares to say it COULD (key word COULD) BE ALIEN you go on a tear that it cannot be.

you claim there is NO EVIDENCE "NADA, ZIP" .
so a major in the army air corp with security clearance to work on perhaps the most secret base at the time with the most secret weapons system available was lying (in first report) then later years when retired that it was material he has never seen before?

that suddenly aluminum foil , balsa wood and tape is mis identified?

that the government has NEVER TO DATE confirmed what the wreckage was...

If you claim it COULD NEVER BE alien then (like the government) its up to you to provide PROOF what it was.

not theory, not reasons why it was covered up, and not the laughable attempt to claim there was no crash with magic wreckage .

ranting about what it isnt does not mean you know what it was...

PROOF PROOF PROOF.

again I stated clearly and openly I DONT KNOW what it was FOR SURE...
but clear evidence for all four main theories balloon, project mogul, a secret tech project gone wrong, or alien .

unlill you can PROVIDE PROOF CLEARLY IDENTIFYING what it was you have a theory...maybe better than some but nothing more.

your book does not provide that.

so lets sum up
you dont believe there was a crash
you will believe government reports except when they clearly mentioned a crash.
you argue definition of wreckage and crash.
major marcell is a lier.
you say you cant definitely prove what it was but it could never be other worldly craft.
so your THEORY is fact

do you need me to get definition of theory too?

scrounger



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 03:58 AM
link   
ok lets try a recap

first known provable facts

an incident happened near the town of roswell and army air base housing the most secret/ only air unit with the (at the time) secret most powerful weapon the nuclear bomb

that night there was a severe electrical storm.

the incident resulted in wreckage being found in a ranchers field.

the rancher investigated it, saw the wreckage and reported it.

Major marcell was first to investigate it, collect some wreckage and July 8, 1947, Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) public information officer Walter Haut reported to the press a "flying disk was recovered"

the military cordoned off the area, didnt allow anyone in and collected wreckage. the exact length of the recovery is unproven but took over a day or two minimum.

the military then held a news conference and changed the story claiming it was a "weather balloon" with marcell holding some EASILY IDENTIFIED as a balloon.

the rancher was taken away by the military for a few days then would not talk about it.

the military flew wreckage away to other bases and the whole project was hushed up.

under pressure the military CONFIRMED in 1994 report that an incident happened in roswell with wreckage at the site.

when issues surfaced upon review of the report another was published in 1997 "roswell case closed"

both did not directly identify what exactly crashed in roswell.

the military changed its story on what it could be at least two times if not more.


this is all the FACTS that are confirmed.

many books have come out (including one here on ATS) with THEORIES.

NO ONE TO DATE CAN CONFIRM with facts what the wreckage was.

the exact items, program and mission (if there was one).

the theories that hold evidence is weather balloon, project mogul, some unnamed government project and alien craft.

until and ONLY UNTIL one can PROVE WITH EVIDENCE what caused that wreckage that all you can say is XX is a theory..

NO ONE (including me) knows what it was.

Period

scrounger



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 04:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: scrounger
ok lets try a recap

first known provable facts

an incident happened near the town of roswell and army air base housing the most secret/ only air unit with the (at the time) secret most powerful weapon the nuclear bomb

that night there was a severe electrical storm.

the incident resulted in wreckage being found in a ranchers field.

the rancher investigated it, saw the wreckage and reported it.

Major marcell was first to investigate it, collect some wreckage and July 8, 1947, Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) public information officer Walter Haut reported to the press a "flying disk was recovered"

the military cordoned off the area, didnt allow anyone in and collected wreckage. the exact length of the recovery is unproven but took over a day or two minimum.

the military then held a news conference and changed the story claiming it was a "weather balloon" with marcell holding some EASILY IDENTIFIED as a balloon.

the rancher was taken away by the military for a few days then would not talk about it.

the military flew wreckage away to other bases and the whole project was hushed up.

under pressure the military CONFIRMED in 1994 report that an incident happened in roswell with wreckage at the site.

when issues surfaced upon review of the report another was published in 1997 "roswell case closed"

both did not directly identify what exactly crashed in roswell.

the military changed its story on what it could be at least two times if not more.


this is all the FACTS that are confirmed.

many books have come out (including one here on ATS) with THEORIES.

NO ONE TO DATE CAN CONFIRM with facts what the wreckage was.

the exact items, program and mission (if there was one).

the theories that hold evidence is weather balloon, project mogul, some unnamed government project and alien craft.

until and ONLY UNTIL one can PROVE WITH EVIDENCE what caused that wreckage that all you can say is XX is a theory..

NO ONE (including me) knows what it was.

Period

scrounger






Well said, and very right. No one knows what happend, or what crashed in Roswell. Non believers will also believe the stories that do not point to ET, and believers will always believe stories that prove it was ET. Different groups but pretty much the same when it comes to belief.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: scrounger



...the military cordoned off the area, didnt allow anyone in and collected wreckage. the exact length of the recovery is unproven but took over a day or two minimum.


Is that actually a known fact or simply hearsay from William Woody and a handful of others speaking in the 1990s? Are there are any news reports or documents from 1947 that confirm it?

edit on 1/1/2019 by mirageman because: ...



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: scrounger

And I challenge you to stop doing the time warp and stay focused on when the events occurred - 1947

I drive my beat up old jeep into the desert and it dies ... I leave it there... poof - we have wreckage in the desert that was never airborne...it is that simple... to be an airborne crash requires that someone saw it fly in the first place...

If you can somehow stay present in 1947, newspapers report EXACTLY what Brazel recovered...and suffice it to say that it sounds EXACTLY like a weather balloon or a kite ...

So unless you can show SOME proof from 1947 that something exotic was seen flying over Roswell and someone saw it crash and someone recorded contemporaneously the recovery of an exotic machine..your alien theory is forced...and forced by belief..because you have no evidence... Instead, you try to weave a story that spans decades to fit your belief...

You haven't read my book, because if you had, you would notice that the human deception theory for Roswell doesn't care what was recovered at Roswell..it has supporting data to substantiate the theory without needing a time machine or contrived proof...the original documentation is available for you to read for yourself...and that is all I am asking you to provide ...ORIGINAL documentation from the time the event occurred that states specifically that something exotic crashed (tin foil and wood and rubber is not exotic)...you can't ... so you keep trying to turn the table and have me prove your alien theory is a possibility...when it has zero supporting evidence

Your "facts" are not even facts: For example:

"That night there was a severe electrical storm" - says who? First you have to be able to establish the night the event occurred..i.e. your alleged crash ... to be able to correlate it with a weather event.

"The military cordoned off the area" ... says who in 1947? That is your time machine witness data from decades later...

"the rancher was taken away by the military for a few days then would not talk about it. " ...says who in 1947? That is your time machine witness data from decades later...

"the military flew wreckage away to other bases and the whole project was hushed up. " ... says who in 1947? I have a 1947 newspaper article that states the "wreckage" never left Fort Worth. What do you have from 1947 that states otherwise?

You get my drift here? I know it is painful to abide by evidentiary standards, but unless you are willing to do that... you keep blowing hot air based on belief...and contribute nothing to the resolution of the mystery...



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: scrounger



...the military cordoned off the area, didnt allow anyone in and collected wreckage. the exact length of the recovery is unproven but took over a day or two minimum.


Is that actually a known fact or simply hearsay from William Woody and a handful of others speaking in the 1990s? Are there are any news reports or documents from 1947 that confirm it?


Well, it was supposedly a known fact that a weather balloon crashed in Roswell. Then it was a known fact that project mogul crashed in Roswell. Both explanations believed at the time that both these were correct.

So, any explanation that goes against the ET explanation is always going to be believed by certain people.

It there a difference between the ET craft crash, and the people who blindly believe official explanations?

Not really! Both groups hugely rely on their beliefs, so both groups cannot be trusted if I am honest!

There is nothing wrong with holding your hands up and saying "I do not know what happend in Roswell. And there is nothing wrong with questioning official explanations regarding this case, because they are clearly lies.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Jay-morris

Facts can only be established based on evidence.

ET proponents who believe Roswell to be an ET event use witness testimony collected decades later as their evidence base.

Debunkers who believe Roswell to be a Mogul balloon have 1947 evidence upon which to base their beliefs.

But, neither the ET or Debunkers can logically explain the following:

1. Why the 509th put out the press release to begin with? Who authorized the press release?
2. Why the AP and UP stories printed on Roswell appear to have originated from distinct press releases?

Throwing one's hands in the air does not get to the bottom of a mystery. Hardcore investigation based on accepted evidentiary standards does.



posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: jamescarrion


Debunkers who believe Roswell to be a Mogul balloon have 1947 evidence upon which to base their beliefs. 


That is not true. The same old people believed that official story because it went against the ET theory, simple as that. Anyone could see (without relying on their beliefs) that the weather balloon explanation did not make sense, and project Mogal did not make sense, but people still chose to believe them.

Your theory could very well be right, but it is just a theory. I do not think we will ever get to the bottom of this. But out of all the theories I have come across, yours is the most plausible.




top topics



 
34
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join