posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 12:30 PM
Mr. Levy contends that top military personnel, and all other witnesses involved failed to identify tin foil, balsa wood, and neoprene balloons? Sure,
buy that if you wish, or look here:
and examine the evidence yourself. See what conclusions you come to.
Warning: it's quite a read. The link above is to the first thread of the series. The series continues on through the link at the bottom of the
Is that true? That is the first I've heard that. I was always under the impression that the roswell crash was among the best for evidence, anecdotal
and objective. Could this be the author's possible bias toward the subject? Or is what he is saying really true?
It is. We've got the military's own announcement of the capture of a disc (official press release), high-ranking military witnesses (from
Sergeants, Lieutenants, Intel Officers, Generals, etc.), a clear trail of events (that of course easily show this was no mere balloon retrieval), and
numerous townspeople involved in the incident with corraborating stories.
It's obvious the author failed to adequetely research it, but not surprising, when making an obvious cash grab book lightly touching on sensational
topics, just to make a buck, without even spending an iota of time investigating the subjects. The UFO field is rife with false witnesses (even in
the best cases), and unscrupulous authors and researchers, as well as false contactees (see Adamski, Meier, etc.). The key to understanding is to
eventually be able to separate the wheat from the chaff.
[edit on 6-8-2005 by Gazrok]