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.
originally posted by: Shadowhawk
How about physical evidence? It's one thing to debate the likelihood of extraterrestrial visitation on Earth, or whether an advanced craft would be prone to malfunction after crossing interstellar space. The real issue, in my opinion, is people's willingness to believe such things occur without any physical evidence whatsoever.
Alleged incidents of government UFO crash retrievals include the "big ones" like Roswell, Aztec, or Kecksburg but some people believe there have been more than 70 such events. So, where is the proof? I propose that we should examine alleged UFO crashes through an entirely different lens than has been applied thus far.
I have noticed that many UFO crash retrieval stories share common elements:
- The incident and recovery of debris allegedly had the highest level of security classification (similar to a special access “black” project).
- The unknown object crashed on public (usually rural) land in relatively close proximity to a civilian population.
- Civilian witnesses were often interrogated and warned by government officials to forget what they saw.
- The crash site was secured and controlled by government personnel for as long as deemed necessary to conduct recovery operations.
- Cleanup of crash debris was given top priority.
While overall details differ, all UFO crash retrieval stories seem to end the same way. A government cleanup crew – either comprised of common soldiers or elite special forces – sanitizes the crash site, removing every trace of debris. Civilian UFO investigators are therefore left with no hope of finding physical evidence at the scene. Is such a thing possible or even probable? Could the government sanitize a crash site?
I argue that government response in the wake of a crash involving a top-secret aircraft (such as those flown from Area 51, for example) would be virtually indistinguishable from the response to a UFO crash. National security concerns would dictate a need to prevent classified materials from falling into the hands of civilians or foreign intelligence agents. In fact, descriptions of secret airplane crashes are virtually indistinguishable from UFO crash retrieval stories and tend to include all or most of the elements described above.
When an A-12 spy plane being operated from Area 51 crashed near Wendover, Utah, in May 1963, the CIA deflected public and media scrutiny with a cover story that an ordinary F-105 fighter jet had crashed. Declassified documents indicate that security at the time was paramount and cleanup was top priority, even superseding the accident investigation. People who were involved with the cleanup told me that they sanitized the site - even a formerly secret document claimed "all traces were removed from the crash scene."
Another Area 51 project was the stealthy, ramjet-powered reconnaissance D-21 drone. One version, called the D-21B, was carried under the wing of a B-52 bomber and launched using a booster rocket. In September 1967, a D-21B was inadvertently launched during what was supposed to be a captive test flight over central Nevada. According to my interviews with military and civilian witnesses, personnel from Area 51 secured the crash site as quickly as possible and members of a cleanup crew walked shoulder-to-shoulder through the debris field, picking up every piece. Witnesses were admonished to forget what they had seen.
An F-117A stealth fighter crashed on a mountain near Bakersfield, California, in July 1986. At the time, it was still an unacknowledged "black" program. The impact site was declared a National Defense Area to prevent entry by unauthorized personnel. Armed guards manned roadblocks at perimeter checkpoints and helicopters patrolled the skies as crews worked for several weeks to clean up the site. Air Force spokesmen refused to identify the aircraft type. Confirmation didn’t come until the existence of the F-117A was announced in November 1988.
With details of these events now declassified, it is possible for civilian researchers to study official correspondence and accident investigation reports, interview civilian and government witnesses, and visit the crash sites to search for debris. Physical evidence retrieved from a crash site can be studied and identified using declassified documents, photos, and even entire airframes on display in museums. The results of such research can serve as baseline data for comparison to UFO crash retrieval stories. In fact, I visited many such crash sites and in every instance found identifiable physical evidence. The sites had not been sanitized. Crash debris can be identified through analysis of materials, construction methods, part numbers and inspection stamps, and by finding recognizable components.
I would expect UFOlogists to embrace this information since they have always been told that the government cleans up every trace of debris at top-secret crash sites. Apparently, that is not the case.
Physical evidence can confirm or disconfirm the validity of claims about any alleged crash retrieval incident. As pioneering forensic scientist Edmond Locard (1877-1966) once wrote, “Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it can diminish its value.”
a reply to: one4all
originally posted by: one4all
I encourage anyone who is considering becoming a Truther...
originally posted by: ConfusedBrit
originally posted by: one4all
I encourage anyone who is considering becoming a Truther...
I'm sorry, but who wakes up one morning and decides, "I wanna be a Truther"?
Is this a USA thang? Don't such decisions occur organically, as in gradually during the course of natural interest and gathering knowledge?
It's not as easy as waking up one morning and deciding, "I wanna be a dork".
originally posted by: one4all
This is the reason no one will ever agree on what constitutes valid evidence...."100% of People who drink Water...die.".....EVIDENCE PROVES that......get it......evidence proves that 100% of People who drink Water die so should you drink Water or should you refuse to drink Water to save your own life.
We have to trust each other over and above empirical evidence.It is that simple...then TPTB are disenfranchised.