A piece of Roswell unsolved

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Some research:


Weaver's report says there was a cover-up at Roswell, only not the "flying saucer" recovery conspiracy that is commonly alleged. Nor was the incident an airplane crash, a nuclear accident, or a missile test gone wrong. In fact, says the Air Force, the answer to the Roswell controversy lies in a top secret research project that for reasons of national security was sheltered from the public. The answer, in short, is Project MOGUL.

After the World War II, the United States turned suspicious eyes on the Soviet Union, and worried most of all about Russia's budding nuclear program. One of many efforts to track the progress of Soviet nukes was Project MOGUL, a set of experiments designed to determine the ability of balloon-carried sensors to detect the far-away blasts of nuclear bomb tests. MOGUL "cluster flights" or "balloon trains," carrying multiple acoustic sensors and radar tracking devices, were lofted through the clouds by up to two dozen weather balloons connected in a string measuring hundreds of feet in length. (Air Force 1st Lt. James McAndrew produced a detailed summary of Project MOGUL to accompany Col. Weaver's report.)


You can read the full report here:
www.parascope.com...

And my apologies for going of subject, if I did, but the thread is titled "A piece of Roswell unsolved".




posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 11:12 AM
link   


I hate to busrt your bubble, but the military came out in 1995 and admitted that the "Roswell" incident was nothing more than a "spy balloon" experiment, and the "aliens" that were found were nothing more than military dummies.


lol...doesnt this little statement kind of contradict with the title under your name?



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheShroudOfMemphis

... Why the hell would the OSI agents, reveal their identities and then go on to share some of America's darkest secrets with a dude that runs a UFO museum in Roswell?

He had nothing, he knew nothing. If they had already intercepted him via the first phone call, then logic would state they would already have delt with the old guy and got the metal back. They could of left it at that and let this guy believe he was hoaxed.

Instead they show up, tell him some secrets, confirm to him for no reason that he wasn't being hoaxed and then leave him with more secrets.

Yet he has no proof. All he has is his own 'notes' and all his leads are either 'false names' or of the 'never heard of them again' type. If you can't research it, you can't debunk it! Brilliant.

The story sounds legit up to when he arrives at the meeting point, then it turns into an imaginary tale. I dare say this guy got hoaxed and had the hard part of the story already made for him so he created a tale to promote his museum.

I'm usually pretty open with this stuff but this just stinks of creative writing.




[edit on 18-11-2005 by TheShroudOfMemphis]


Might I suggest you go back to the site, look at the "contact" page,
send him an email, and ask him these questions. That's what research
is all about, isn't it?

You have questions...doubts.... that need answers. Then go to the source
and ask.

The only thing you are presenting here is your own assumption and
speculations.

You'll never know until you ask.




posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 12:47 AM
link   
I conducted a search for the original story. Here is a link:

www.rense.com...

Hope this helps.



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by FEMA
I conducted a search for the original story. Here is a link:

www.rense.com...

Hope this helps.


"Page cannot be found"



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Hmm, I've just clicked on it and the page came right up. I'm not sure why it is not showing for you partner.

Try going to the rense search engine at the bottom of their page, then click it and it will take you to a page that will allow you to get to a google search engine defined to search rense. Type in this term: Promising Roswell Eyewitness . . . you'll find yourself on a UFO archive page at rense.

Then hit ctrl + F and type in the same term. It should take you to the story. Click and read.

Hope that helps.



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   
And, again, if that doesn't work, you can go here:
Interception

or if you prefer to see the actual url, you can click here:
www.truthseekeratroswell.com...

Both links will take you directly to the site/story/same page.


Hope this helps.





posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 05:17 PM
link   
ok here goes. my two cents on this topic. when i first read the story my first reaction was "hey this old feller is tryin to get her to come back" then i went to the other sites and read them. guess what same reaction. just so you know i have followed the ufo thing for almost forty years and i'm still not convinced. by the same token i dont deny or dismiss them just put them in the catagory as JC. i'll believe it when i see it. and i will always maintain an open mind cause when you aren't open to different things then you might as welll go live in a cave.



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by WalksThroughTime
Might I suggest you go back to the site, look at the "contact" page,
send him an email, and ask him these questions. That's what research
is all about, isn't it?

You have questions...doubts.... that need answers. Then go to the source
and ask.

The only thing you are presenting here is your own assumption and
speculations.

You'll never know until you ask.




Well thanks for the ideas but i don't really care that much.
His whole story is designed to go around in circles and have no end because he clearly states that there is no proof other than what he can tell you when you read between the lines. Take out the parts which sound like a movie script and you have a guy that got to a diner after a stranger called him and that's about it.

Your all free to believe him thou of course but i doubt how believing him when he has got a vested interest in a top secret UFO story that revolves around his museum and even features itself in the story (the part where he mentions the Alien dummy is one of their top attractions or that 'something big is going to happen in Roswell soon' - of which it's been 8 years and nothing), will really break much ice in the Roswell incident since the buck ends with him and he has no other proof.

That type of evidence is never worth relying on.



posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Shrouded...

If you don't care that much, as you say, then why do you go on and on about it?



posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by WalksThroughTime
Shrouded...

If you don't care that much, as you say, then why do you go on and on about it?





Because i find it interesting that people will believe anything they are told without putting a minute aside to look at it logically and would rather try to force the puzzle piece into place than simply analyzing the information to see if it's even logical to begin with. That i'll admit can be interesting, but do i care which way people decide to put their trust? Not really.

Would i waste my time in starting up some kind of email contact with this guy to try and disprove him when he's the only one who can confirm or deny what he says, making it all but impossible to research or validate his claims? No, i don't care that much and i don't see how it will change anything anyway.

I can be confident that it's BS to start with because it has no reason to be true but every reason to be false and if was to start questioning him, why would he admit it to me anyway? He has no reason to, he has a business to run which revolves around these kinds of folk-lore. That i can understand very well but what makes it interesting is how people will forget that part and believe the bits about OSI agents devulging to him about CIA murders and other top secret things which most senators are probably not privy too, all the while, talking up the musuem as being the centre of UFO research, so much so that the OSI agents felt the need to tell him that the Government is watching it and they think something big is going to happen in Roswell soon.

Don't you find that interesting too? A great story but a much better marketing campaign.

Not everything is an emotion journey, especially on a message board. Somethings are just interesting to observe and this is one of those moments.

You don't literally have to care about something to interact with it.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheShroudOfMemphis


... Not everything is an emotion journey, especially on a message board. Somethings are just interesting to observe and this is one of those moments.

You don't literally have to care about something to interact with it.






Then so be it.





posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 10:26 PM
link   
look all you hafta do is study stan friedmans work and see for yourself
www.stantonfriedman.com... he's been workin on this for a loooong time....hes done the leg work and the research......i myself have read and researched the UFO phenom for about 30 yrs and it seems he is the most knowledgable



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 10:51 PM
link   
longhaircowboy,

I agree wholeheartedly with you .

Roswell was what it was , but in the end no one would even know anything about Roswell like we do today without Stanton Friedman.

Stanton Friedman was also deep into UFOs before he uncovered the Roswell Incident , he testified before congress in 1968. He uncovered Roswell in 1978 or '79 my memory fails me.



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Yes, I'm military. Please don't allow this fact to cause you to immediatley strive to debunk my view point. I certainly don't wish to debunk yours.

For all those who ponder the truth about UFOs, let us look at the subject matter from the other side of the fence and draw from our personal experiences and logical deductive reasoning to ascertain under what circumstances would we form intentions that would coencide with what actions and behaviors we have interpretted are occurring.

We will have to make assumptions and form educated guesses to answer such questions, but ascertaining the intentions of both senders and recievers (of messages & technology) is paramount in our quest for truth.

We may also have to find a viewpoint that is well outside the box.

What scenarios (draw upon Sci-Fi, history, religion, world events, etc ... ) would support the justification of the masses not knowing what we believe a few people do know?

Ideas anyone?

What would have to have transpired for you to keep such secrets from your race? And, what if knowing meant you had to believe? Knowing fear and operating from the viewpoint of what is most self-serving (our disposition of the Instinct of "Self Preservation") may not serve us best when trying to understand what may be transpiring.



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 10:04 PM
link   
I am not question your integrity, but-we only have your word on this issue,ie no tangible proof.

As far as the ufo/aliens/military issue I see it this way.
I feel that the US government Wants people to believe and others to question what happened. The reason is, any real info going out can be laughed at and ignored. To do that correctly, they do actually leak out real information, but since most people cannot tell real from planted fakes-it is all view as questionable at best. Remember the best lies are 80% truth.

It reminds me of an episode of the tv show XFiles. It is explained that they need people chasing the "little green men" and they are given info and clues that either go away or are disproved. This limits public support, but causes these people to redouble their efforts.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
my only problem with your post is that you say a lie is 80% truth....well then it isnt a lie....look it up in your funk & wagnel.....a lie is a lie period.
stan friedman has dedicated his life to the pursuit of the truth and while he makes no claim to have uncovered the WHOLE truth i would defer to him re: roswell
and again as to telling fake from real stan has more than once proved it can be done

[edit on 24-11-2005 by longhaircowboy]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
my only problem with your post is that you say a lie is 80% truth....well then it isnt a lie....look it up in your funk & wagnel.....a lie is a lie period.
stan friedman has dedicated his life to the pursuit of the truth and while he makes no claim to have uncovered the WHOLE truth i would defer to him re: roswell
and again as to telling fake from real stan has more than once proved it can be done

[edit on 24-11-2005 by longhaircowboy]


If you reread my post you will see that I said,"
Remember the best lies are 80% truth"


What I ment was that if a lie contains many truths, the actual nontruth part is believed to be truth as well.

Hope that clarified it 4 u.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 10:22 PM
link   
i understood exactly what you said. but me thinks you were refering to half truths which are not lies. a lie contains no truths. thats why they call em lies. again look it up. if you can point me to some reference that says a lie is not really a lie but a hodge podge of truths and untruths then i would be happy to check it out. but my websters makes no mention of truths being part of a lie. as a matter of fact one of the defs uses the word untruth.
sorry wasnt tryin to make you mad just pointing out a minor discrepency.
using two opposite terms in one sentence reminds me of an oxymoron: military intelligence. me thinks thou doest protest too much.
love everyone

[edit on 24-11-2005 by longhaircowboy]

[edit on 24-11-2005 by longhaircowboy]



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
i understood exactly what you said. but me thinks you were refering to half truths which are not lies. a lie contains no truths. thats why they call em lies. again look it up. if you can point me to some reference that says a lie is not really a lie but a hodge podge of truths and untruths then i would be happy to check it out. but my websters makes no mention of truths being part of a lie. as a matter of fact one of the defs uses the word untruth.
sorry wasnt tryin to make you mad just pointing out a minor discrepency.
using two opposite terms in one sentence reminds me of an oxymoron: military intelligence. me thinks thou doest protest too much.
love everyone

[edit on 24-11-2005 by longhaircowboy]

Perhaps I should have said something more like the best way to hide the truth is to have stories which have 80% truth and then the 20% untruth would be acceped just like the 80% truth.

[edit on 24-11-2005 by longhaircowboy]






top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join