It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Man claims metal fragment came from UFO!

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:37 AM
I uploaded this interesting and entertaining Interview should anyone like to hear it.


8.55 MB (8,966,448 bytes)

Download here

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:48 AM
I'll get a photo of the one I have and sell it cheap.


posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:32 AM
i didnt read the whole thread so i dont know if any one has said this before, but i would think that in a ufo, if made out of metal, would be composed of stuff entirerly known to us.
a ufo would want to be very light, so would only use the first couple of metalic elemants. i read a book about a ufo thing in brazil and a guy got a bit of metal off it, it was absolutly pure magnesium, and any impurities in it were know to the scientists that tested it. what they didnt know was the method of casting.
back to the thing this guy has, we have a nearly compleate peridoic table, any unknown metal is actually know by looking at the periods, we can work out its weight, proerties everything by looking at the others.
ufos wont be made out of an unkown metal, as really there is none. if it were a compsite even a spectrographic analysis would show all the elements in it, and in what quantities. any unkown element would be able to be deduced by periodic table, although it wqouldnt be smart to have such an element in there, as they are very heavey and extremly unstable.

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 08:03 AM
As I said earlier, I also think that the elements of the object would be known but the alloy would not. Nor could we know the purpose of it. If you want to discard something and don't want it identified, melting it down before throwing it out would be a good way.

I called and talked to a partner of Bob White, and he gave me their websites. The first is new and under construction, and the second is the original and has a discussion board.

He told me the CIC document on the fragment found in the 40's is accessible from there, but I haven’t found it yet. He said it was obtained by John Greenwald Jr. (who runs Black Vault) and Clifford Stone. I am interested in finding out if there is more in common with Bob's fragment. If I can find it, I will provide a link, unless someone else finds it first.

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 09:08 AM
Who is saying he spend 200 000 on tests? Himself? Ohh that's beliveable! Not!

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:50 PM

Originally posted by Ghaele
Who is saying he spend 200 000 on tests? Himself? Ohh that's beliveable! Not!

It sounds like alot, could be exagerated, but he has had an analysis done by seven different labs, and has also paid for several polygraph (lie detector) tests done on himself. I found one reciept in his documents section on his website for a polygraph test that cost $300, which is a far cry from $200,000.

Polygraph receipt

His other documents can be viewed here at Photobucket.

However if anyone is interested, I did manage to find the government document on a similar object found in 1948 (I think at least that is the date on the document). It is combined with other Army UFO cases into one PDF file that is 22MB. Its from Black Vault and is Army File 202085. Just click on the first link labeled Army.

I did not see anything but pictures of the object with a ruler next to it. I haven't found any report of how the object was found. I will have to read more later. No description or anything, it is only listed under the folder name "Flying Saucer".

edit: fixed link

[edit on 8/5/2005 by Hal9000]

posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 08:17 PM
After reviewing half of the CIC document (358 pages), I still have not found any description of the object in the "flying saucer from Denmark". It looks to me that there are several objects. Some of the pages are duplicates, but I see at least three different objects. At least one is just a circular object and two look similar to Bob Whites fragment. But with out more info you can't conclude it was even a metallic object.

An interesting point though, further in the document are files on the Horten brothers. They were the first Germans to design the flying wing during WW2. There are mentions of locating them after the war and bring them in under operation Paper Clip. Some interesting reading.

posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 09:47 PM
very intereseting , would like to hear from the women that was with him that night.

posted on Aug, 7 2005 @ 03:22 PM

Originally posted by thepresidentsbrain
I uploaded this interesting and entertaining Interview should anyone like to hear it.

Thanks, that was an interesting interview. He explains more details about his story, and answered a few of my questions.

Originally posted by Inno887
very intereseting , would like to hear from the women that was with him that night.

This was one question I had. Has this women corroborated his story?

In the radio interview that thepresidentsbrain posted, Bob White described her as a "working girl" that offered him a ride to Las Vegas. He didn't keep in touch with her and has not been able to locate her. He also explained that he did not tell her he found the fragment because he thought she would not let him put it in her car, because she was very hysterical from the encounter. So she would only be able to corroborate the sighting, but would not be able to say he found the fragment at the time of the sighting.

He also mentioned that someone contacted him who had seen the other fragment found in Denmark in the forties. He claimed he performed tests on it for the military or something. This man told him it was nearly identical, but had no knowledge of where it is being kept.

Bob White also spoke of some people having strange effects by holding the fragment. One person said it made his arm go numb, and another said it made his lips go numb. Bob said that it has never affected him in any way.

He made plenty of mentions about his book, which at the time of the interview wasn't published. He is advertising it now on his website, so I will try to get a copy and read it.

posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 07:41 AM
no we might not have known the alloy previoucly, but as soon as it is tessted we would, and call it alloy 23 b or waht ever, and that be that.

posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 08:29 AM
On the back of most grinders in any machine chop you will find a very similiar object comprised of whatever metals have been ground or cut off using the grinder.( When i say similiar i mean exactly the same shape ) Now not to add credibility to this nor take away from it but the reason these objects are formed on the back of grinders is becuase of the metal dust particles and the extreme heat cause them to form , kinda like stalagmites they just build up over time. If this object is brittle then from my experience it was formed under a lower heat if its not then an excessive amount of heat was present during its formation however i cannot find any mention as to if its brittle or not.

Anyway just by looks this object could be formed from a craft that expelled dust particles through some high heat exhaust port or it could be off the back of someones shop grinder.

posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 12:59 PM

Originally posted by minniescar
If this object is brittle then from my experience it was formed under a lower heat if its not then an excessive amount of heat was present during its formation however i cannot find any mention as to if its brittle or not.

Bob White said in the radio interview that before he sent the fragment to Los Alamos, he cut a piece off with a hacksaw. He said it took a couple of hours, and went through three hacksaw blades to cut just the tip off. Los Alamos cut a sample off the wider side using a diamond blade, but did not say how difficult it was. The report did say the hardness was higher than normal, but within norms for an aluminum alloy.


The same samples (both perpendicular and parallel cuts) used for optical microscopy were used to measure hardness. A Vickers Hardness number was obtained from a Leco Tester using a diamond tip micro-indenter. Five indentations were made for each sample. The size of the resulting indentations were measured under the light microscope, and averaged. This average value, along with the known applied load were used to come up with the Vicker's Hardness number. For the perpendicular cut, VH = 60. For the parallel cut, VH = 62. The difference is probably within experimental error. These values are slightly higher than pure aluminum, and typical for aluminum alloys.

All I know is that aluminum is pretty easy to cut, because it is a soft metal. If the fragment was quenched in water while it was still hot, would increase the hardness on the surface. Also the report did say the elements were consistent throughout the sample, so the whole thing had to be molten at the same time. I still don’t know what to think. I would like to see other test results on the hardness and see if they match.

posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 01:36 PM
I'd spend 200,000 getting my toenails tested if I thought it would convince someone enough to give me 10,000,000 for them.

[edit on 11/8/05 by hidatsa]

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 06:13 PM
I very seldom do photos right so if these don't show, SOMEBODY help me out.

I'll sell out cheap too. Lets say 1/2 million


[edit on 14-8-2005 by Roper]

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 08:32 PM
Thanks for the pics Roper.

I was able to see them fine but will still make it easier.

BTW, you can show images by pasting the url after selecting the image button when posting. It is the 7th button from the left, that looks like a computer screen with a color pallet in front of it.

That looks pretty close, except it looks darker in color and has jagged sides. Can you give more info on where you got it and what metal is it made of? Was that from a cut saw in a metal fab shop? It looks like it was buildup over time. How solid is it? Can you break it if you wanted to?

I would also be interested in a close up shot of the bulb end and some of the scales if it isn't too much trouble.

Originally posted by Roper
I'll sell out cheap too. Lets say 1/2 million

Put it up on ebay and see what happens.

Seriously, thanks for posting the pictures.

I did get a copy of his book and read it. There is more test info, that I haven't gone over yet. I still had some questions though so I sent an e-mail and hopefully I get a reply soon.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:10 PM
This is from maintenance resurfacing of rail road tracks. I live and work by a heavily used rail system so every year or so a grinder train comes thought here. It throws sparks every where, it also puts down H2O as it moves.

Friend of ours has one that is a stand alone.

My son tried to sharpen it into a point. It is very solid. The sparks just weld themselves together.


I guess I just talked myself out of a cool 1/2 mil,huh.

posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 07:18 AM
For those that may still be interested in Bob White’s metal fragment, I was able to get into contact with Dr. Robert Gibbons. He is Bob White’s friend and was curator of the Museum of the Unexplained, where the object was on display. I am unable to contact Bob White himself because he has closed the museum and is now touring different parts of the country, and is unavailable.

I asked Dr. Gibbons a few questions, which he was willing to answer, and gave permission to post.

The first question on everyone’s mind is that Bob said he has invested $200,000 in trying to determine what the object was and where it came from. Can you tell me how much it cost to have the metal analyzed at the various labs?

I believe Bob was misquoted on the amount of money spent on the object, and this amount was corrected on his old website Bob has said he invested his life's savings on trying to tell the story of the object, but I can't confirm the amount he spent.

I will note that I found out later that in the book it explains that most of the testing done at the labs was funded by other various means, so I believe that Bob White probably invested his money into the museum and his book. But as Dr. Gibbons mentioned, he was misquoted on the amount.

The next question is in reference to the event. Bob said the fragment was ejected from a UFO when it was at a very high altitude. The object struck the earth and left an 18-inch deep trench in the ground. Can you tell me how long the trench was, and if any velocity estimates were done? If so does it coincide with Bob’s description of the amount of time it took to fall to the ground?

Joe Fandrich of Mesa State College told us when we were out in Grand Junction, CO that he was going to do a computer simulation of the object's descent, including velocity estimates, velocity when it struck the ground, etc. I was at the site in the desert and saw the place Bob said the object struck the ground, and the slope was 50-75 feet in length to the bottom.

I was looking at the CIC document of a similar object that Dr. Gilbert Jordan said he has seen and the government still has in possession. I know Dr. Jordan said the object was very similar to the one Bob White found. It would have been helpful if the file contained a description of the object other than “Flying Saucer from Denmark”. I find it rather odd that there isn’t any more info in the file. Have you been able to find any more information on how it was obtained? Were there any similar trace elements?

The only information about the C.I.C. file and "Flying Saucer from Denmark" we have was reproduced in Bob's book. It is also on Dr. Jordan gave an interview to KY3 in Springfield, MO and listed some of the elements he was told were in the C.I.C. object in Utah. They were consistent with the elements found in Bob's object.

Bob White has said in his book that he believed he was being hampered and there was some attempt to cover this up by the government. Can you explain this in more detail other than the official report from Los Alamos? Has there been any visitation by any government official with regard to the object?

I feel that two government agents came to the museum in Reeds Spring while I was there and asked questions. We were so sure that we had a security sweep of the museum and office for bugs. Bob talked about his feelings that there was a cover-up in his book. LANL apparantly kept a slice of his object, and a scientist with connections to M.I.T. wouldn't return a piece from the small end that Bob loaned him for tests.

Finally, about the problems that were encountered with not being able to open the safe at the hotel when the object was kept in it overnight. When the safe was finally opened, the security personnel found the battery was drained and damaged. Have any other experiments been conducted with batteries in close proximity to the object? I again was intrigued with the results of the experiments with the dental x-ray film, and that the object was able to hold a charge of electricity.

I did a series of tests with the x-ray films and got an exposure showing the two black spots on the film left under the object for 48 hours. We got EMF readings with a German meter that was filmed by the Flame TV crew and shown on the "Jane Goldman Investigates" show. I worked at the museum for two years and the batteries in the turntable under the object had to be replaced at a greater frequency than without the object on it. Unfortunately, Galde Press did not publish the full report on the x-ray tests. There were also exposures around the side of the object at the big end, and Joe Fandrich felt the object contains two sources of radiation inside the big end.

I again thank Dr. Gibbons for taking the time to answer my questions.

After reading the book, absorbing what I could from the test results, and hearing of the anomalous properties described by Dr. Gibbons, I believe this warrants a serious scientific study. I don’t doubt Bob White’s story on how he found the object. He seems to be very adamant about his story and has passed three polygraph tests. But did the object come from an extraterrestrial craft? Could this be the hard evidence that has eluded the UFO phenomenon all these years?

More testing obviously needs to be done. Dr. Gibbons also told me a scientist at NASA JPL wanted perform another strontium isotope test, but needed approval. They have not heard back from him at the time the museum closed. This test would confirm one test that showed it had the same isotope levels as two meteorites.

I also read replies on the hardevidence discussion board, and there were a few interesting theories on what the fragment could have been. The one I found interesting is that someone suggested that the craft uses aluminum as fuel. Maybe the craft ejected it to make room for a fresh fuel source. I keep being reminded of a few other UFO encounters that witnesses say the craft appeared to shed some material before disappearing, and wondered why no one ever recovered any of it. Well, maybe Bob White did.

posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 12:36 PM
I wanted to add some information to HAL 9000's interview with me. The four labs in the world that can do isotope abundance ratio tests are (1) La Jolla, CA; (2) Germany; (3) NASA JPL in Pasadena, CA; and NASA JSC in Houston, TX. The director who oversees both the La Jolla and Germany labs does not want to do further tests on Bob's object. The tests at La Jolla included isotope abundance ratio tests for Strontium and Chromium. The Strontium results are consistent with meteorites from Mars found in Antarctica and India. The Chromium tests were inconclusive because of lack of enough sample to do the tests accurately. The scientist at La Jolla who did the tests on Bob's object for free said the Chromium tests were the definative tests to determine if an object is extraterrestrial or not. The scientist at NASA JPL said he wouldn't do the tests on Bob's object "unless I know where it came from." The scientist at NASA JSC in Houston said he was interested in doing the tests but needed approval of his superiors at NASA to do them. As of this writing, I haven't heard that he got that approval. Dr. Robert H. Gibbons, Former Executive Director, Museum of the Unexplained in Reeds Spring, MO.

posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 02:10 PM
Welcome Dr. Gibbons, I'm glad you decided to join ATS and answer more questions. Thanks for clarifying about the type of test and who is capable of doing it. I have questions about this, but I would like to backtrack a little, and go over some assumptions I have made at the beginning.

But first, can you first give a brief biography of yourself, and how you became involved with Bob White?

My first question is, was I correct in assuming that this object could not be formed naturally, as in the form of a meteorite? As far as I know, aluminum is not in a pure form naturally, so it must have been purified, being roughly 85% aluminum. I just want rule out that the object Bob White recovered could not be formed naturally in space, then melted when entering the atmosphere.

If we rule that out, is there any other support that the object could not be a piece of “space junk” that re-entered the atmosphere? Earlier someone on that website said it could have been a part from an airplane that fell to the ground. But I know it would not have melted on the way down even if the plane was 50 thousand feet up.

One thing that I think supports that it is not a piece of space junk, is that it is similar to the other object recovered by the CIC back in the Forties when there wasn’t any space junk in orbit.

Can you explain the significance of the Strontium and Chromium isotopes being found in the object. Why does the presence of Chromium isoptopes suggest it is extraterrestrial?

Again welcome, and thanks for your time.

Hopefully some other members will ask some questions.

edit: more questions.

[edit on 8/21/2005 by Hal9000]

posted on Aug, 22 2005 @ 06:24 AM
A brief resume: I have a bachelor's degree in Physics from Drury University in Springfield, MO; graduate work leading to a Master's of Science Degree in Instrumental Sciences from the Graduate Institute of Technology in Little Rock, AR where I was a Graduate Assistant for NASA (NsG-713 "Instrumental Applictions of the Laser"; and an honorate Doctorate from St. Xavier's University in Calcutta, India. My Master's thesis was "Holography Using A Pulsed Ruby Laser". I worked at the Particle Accelerator Division of the Argonne National Laboratory (a sister lab to Los Alamos National Laboratory) for the Atomic Energy Commission. I was an Associate Engineer for the Hughes Aircraft Co. in Fullerton, CA and Head, Technical Publications for Lear-Siegler, Inc. in Anaheim, CA. I was Senior Laboratory Technician for the ACD of Northrop-Grumman, Inc. in Springfield, MO. I served 21.5 years in the Army (Active and Reserves) where I was a Nuclear Medical Science Officer, Survey Officer for the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency in Edgewood Arsenal, MD and Staff Duty Officer for the U.S. Army Testing & Evaluation Command in Aberdeen, MD. I have taught physics at the high school and college level. I retired from the military in 2003 and was Executive Director for the Museum of the Unexplained in Reeds Spring, MO for two years on-site.

I believe most major tests on Bob White's object say it is made by intelligent beings, rather than being an object found in Nature. Some say it is a piece of "space junk" from the Green River military base in Utah, not far from where Bob found it, but I believe you have to take all of Bob's story with the bright light on the ground, joining the other UFO with the "blue lines" on the side, and then the Bob White object being ejected from the combined UFO as it flew off. That's no space junk! Bob passed polygraph tests on the entire story of how he recovered the object.

Chris MacIsaac from the La Jolla Isotope Lab of Cosmochemistry, part of the Scripps Institute, contacted Bob White about testing his object. Chris was part of the team that determined extraterrestrial impact on Earth 65 million years ago and tested the meteorites from Mars. His lab does isotope work for NASA and the European Space Agency. Why Strontium and Chromium? Those happen to be isotopes that give definite signatures to determine if a sample is extraterrestrial or not. Going along with the above question whether or not Bob's object is natural rather than fabricated, here's Chris's quote: "We have determined that the sample is fabricated. There is no chemical composition in Nature (planet Earth), Moon, Mars, or the Asteroid Belt that has such a high concentration of Aluminum relative to the other elements. There is no natural substance, mineral or meteorite with so much Aluminum and thus we conclude the sample is some kind of Aluminum alloy manufactured here on Earth or somewhere else". Chris goes on to talk about Chromium: "The Cr 53/54 ratio will tell us without a doubt whether this sample came from planet Earth or from somewhere else. Chromium is unique because it is definite. Titanium and Strontium isotopes supply us with information that 'could be definitive' but Chromium is like a pregnancy test--'you are or you're not'". Chris goes on to say that he wants to "revisit" Chromium and maybe he can extract enough Chromium to get an accurate result. Chris probably had a sample from the small end of the object, which is not the actual base metal from the big end. Los Alamos knew enough to test a slice of the big end. Joe Fandrich said that's where the original "object" really is, and the small end is the "tail" of all the molten metal ablating off the original object. Dr. Robert H. Gibbons

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in