Originally posted by zeerox
so, if these symbols real, than you mean Dr. Jesse Marcel Jr's the more credible than Major Jesse Marcel's?
sorry for my english
No. In the end you can't rely on either version of the symbols to be 100% accurate.
The father made mention of symbols some 34-ish years later, most eyewitness descriptions can only be heavily relied on if data is recorded in the
first 10-15 minutes after an event, with recollection worsening with age.
There may be some items in the original set of symbols that are kinda familiar to what was actually seen, but there's no way to be certain of it.
But please, don't let that make you discount the entire recollection of theirs. I find the more fascinating aspects to be found in the descriptions
of the materials he brought with him.
My all time favorite is the "memory metal" average debunkers would love to say that Marcell was simply describing MYLAR, but that could not be the
case, as mylar wasn't made for at least 10 years after the roswell incident. I however don't believe that this material was Mylar, I think it was
something more akin to what we now consider Flexon memory metal, which would not be in existence anywhere near 1947.
Also worth thinking of is the overall description of the I beam itself. Remember that he said the I beam was very, very, rigid and seemed almost
impervious, yet felt so light that there was no way to explain it's inherent strength. That seems to describe a super-advanced alloy to me, what,
I'm unsure, but I have some rough ideas.
See, there's a lot more to the recounting of the materials than just the symbols. When you look at all of it, and then compare the government
response, it doesn't add up at all.
To point that out, you may remember that the government claimed that the craft was infact a balloon. They later had debunkers state that the
symbol-laden I beam was nothing more than BALSA WOOD, with a cheap tape that had patterns on it.
I worked with model rocketry from mid childhood until my mid teens, and that involves a high amount of custom fabrication with balsa wood. Anyone who
has ever worked with balsa wood knows that while the material is indeed light, it is not very strong, the thinner the wood, the more likely you are to
have stress fractures when pressure is applied. So the bals wood argument is a non issue.
Next, the government brought forth debunking to the effect of the "memory metal" being nothing more than cheap aluminum foil. This too, is absurd
when you take Marcel's full description into account. This was not merely a plyable metallic material, it was so durable that it would return to its
original form no matter how you contorted it. I've seen aluminum foil do many things, but I have never seen it reform itself after any force has been
exerted upon it.
That's really just the tip of the iceberge here friend. If you really dig into the entire situation you'll see that it is our true milestone for
alien observation/visitation(you choose). I'm not saying it's all clear-cut, you'll have to wade through a fair amount of questionable materials,
but the good, solid, documented, and reliable information and evidence for Roswell really outweighs the negative.
A series of posts I encourage you to look up on here is Gazrok's excellent Roswell posts (currently 3 parts I believe). I'll try to remember to drop
back in and link them for you in a moment, but just look here on the main page and you will see them.
[EDIT- Here you are:
The Case for Roswell Part I can be seen here: www.abovetopsecret.com...
The Case for Roswell Part II can be seen here: www.abovetopsecret.com...
The Case for Roswell Part III, Section A can be seen here: www.abovetopsecret.com...
The Case for Roswell: Part III (Section B)
Oh, and your english is more than fine, it conveys well what you wish to know or state, that's what counts!
[edit on 2-3-2005 by Xatnys]
[edit on 2-3-2005 by Xatnys]