Roswell Proof: Where is it?

Let's keep in mind that that's the Cn. summation of a GAO investigation. The AF never conducted a proper investigation of the Roswell incident. And the GAO investigation was conducted some 30 years later.
And I ask again for a reasonable illustration of how the tabletop sized debris gouged the massive gash in the desert landscape witnessed by Brazel and Marcel.

From the Horses Mouth!

Here is what Friedman had to say about this.

Re: Bob Pratt Passes

Bob was indeed an outstanding researcher and an outstanding
person.

Over the last several years I have mentioned his name often in
conjunction with disinformation specialist Colonel Richard
Weaver's false claim in the "Roswell Report: Truth vs. fiction
in the New Mexico Desert" that the story first came to light in
an article in the National Inquirer strongly suggesting to any
reader that Jesse Marcel must have gone to the Inquirer - many
others picked up on and repeated this false claim - and also by
implication suggesting I get my UFO witness leads from that
newspaper.

The facts are that the article appeared in 1980 after Bill
Moore and I had essentially completed the research that showed
up in The Roswell Incident.

I had met Bob at MUFON meetings and gave him Jesse's contact
information which he acted upon. I have often said that his
articles were usually far more accurate than those about UFOs in
the NY Times. He will indeed be missed.


Stan Friedman

For longhaircowboy, I am not doing this to insult you, but rather to encourage you to gain ever so slightly in
altitude and join the formation of the debate. You are not that far away.

"The AF never conducted a proper investigation of the Roswell incident. " == longhaircowboy

Define "proper investigation" and how is this determined, and more importantly, by whom?

"And the GAO investigation was conducted some 30 years later." == longhaircowboy

30 years later than what ? Hal and I are involved in discussing the importance and accuracy of date
acknowledgements. Whatever falls out has to apply to BOTH sides of a debate. I am guessing you have more than
a passing interest in this. Another lucrative area of inquiry related to this would be some historical data on the GAO
request, including personalities involved. The who, what, and where kind of thing, if you are up for a "little" challenge.

I have totally ignored your last line, the repeated request, because that leads to some very important guidelines I shall save
for later.

"From the Horses Mouth!" == lost shaman
(Startled me for a sec.....when I saw the caps on "horses" I held my breath.)
"The facts are that the article appeared in 1980 after Bill
Moore and I had essentially completed the research that showed
up in The Roswell Incident. " == SF

The Roswell Incident is clearly listed as first publication in 1980 by Charles Berlitz and William Moore,
NOT by SF ! Here :
The Roswell Incident
www.tomfolio.com...

The AF chronology is STILL correct from a "research" perspective.

Let me introduce the concept of "red flags". Note the statement in the reference I listed above. Well, here :
"Charles Berlitz has written The Bermuda Triangle and The Mystery of Atlantis, and William Moore wrote The Philadelphia Experiment."
Three "red flags" in a short sentence. (Lets see if Access Denied takes this "gift" I have offered him. )

"Well they must have referred to one or all of the Roswell books that have been published prior to 1994, because they did get the year 1978
correct of when SF first talked to Jesse, but they were wrong about the year of the NI interview. Regardless of the chronology of when either
was first printed, it is still wrong. Why is this so hard to acknowledge?" == Hal

It is not hard to acknowledge if you can show me how it is wrong. The NI date is in error while the chronology appears correct. To be wrong,
the chronology has to be incorrect as well. (Try this, an error does NOT cause problems beyond the singular error. If the error leads to an incorrect
conclusion such as the chronology or something further on down the line, then it is wrong. Semantics can be more important than anything.)
And it would not be wrong in a discredible sense. Anything necessary to be checked is in the references. If it aint there, its because that is the politically correct
way of NOT SHOWING sources that LACK credibility. (A "no-no" for responses to Congress in answer to your comment: "I would think it would be
even more important to have the correct information when briefing a congressional inquiry, but maybe that’s just me" OK Hal, here is an experiment for ya.
Next time you go before Congress, try basing your main commentary on the NI, and be sure it is at the top of your reference list. I will furnish the popcorn.)

Originally posted by nightwing
"Well they must have referred to one or all of the Roswell books that have been published prior to 1994, because they did get the year 1978
correct of when SF first talked to Jesse, but they were wrong about the year of the NI interview. Regardless of the chronology of when either
was first printed, it is still wrong. Why is this so hard to acknowledge?" == Hal

It is not hard to acknowledge if you can show me how it is wrong.

:bnghd:

I thought I pointed that out clear enough before and even though I think this horse is fossilized by now, I’ll continue…

If the error leads to an incorrect
conclusion such as the chronology or something further on down the line, then it is wrong. Semantics can be more important than anything.)

It just shows the biased view of the USAF report, so in my opinion, they are committing the same crime that they are accusing the “promoters” of doing. To use a quiche, it’s like the pot calling the kettle black.

And it would not be wrong in a discredible sense. Anything necessary to be checked is in the references. If it aint there, its because that is the politically correct
way of NOT SHOWING sources that LACK credibility. (A "no-no" for responses to Congress in answer to your comment: "I would think it would be
even more important to have the correct information when briefing a congressional inquiry, but maybe that’s just me" OK Hal, here is an experiment for ya.
Next time you go before Congress, try basing your main commentary on the NI, and be sure it is at the top of your reference list. I will furnish the popcorn.)

Then why would you make a reference to the NI in the report, unless you wanted to associate the authors with the NI to try to discredit them?

The lack of references such as the Roswell books that were written prior to the report shows that maybe they didn’t even read them. How can you say the report was a serious investigation into the Roswell incident if they didn’t even reference any books that pertain to the subject?

And just for the record, if I were to get in front of Congress, you better buy stock in that popcorn, because Roswell would be the least of their problems.

Originally posted by Access Denied
Also, I’ve recently been given some new information I had not heard before that suggests that, of all of people, Dr. Crary (MOGUL Field Operations Director) may have unwittingly been the source of the use of the term “flying saucer” in the RDR. Note that the military was using the term “discs”. I’m waiting for confirmation of this story and the source and I will post this information here as soon as I find out. Until then, note this entry from Dr. Crary’s entire diary (included in the attachments to the AF report) that places him in or near Roswell on the 7th which is the day before the story broke…

www.gl.iit.edu...

July 7 (Mon) Alamogordo. Balloon Flight 11 A off at 0503. Big plastic with small auxiliary plastics. WL pear - radiosonde and dribbler. Followed with theodolite and receiver until about 11. Picked up on radiosonde receiver at Roswell and followed them. Finally came down (at 10,000' cap should have punctured plastic) near Hwy 70 between Roswell and Tularosa. Second balloon - met balloons with radio sonde up about 630. Third balloon with 2 1/2 # stick TNTand caps set by pressure element to fire at 35,000' up at 0630. Surface bombing at Site 4 from 545 to 845 at 15 min intervals. Ireland followed main receiver only about 314 hr but followed radio sonde about 3 hrs. 35,000' explosion off about 655.

Vivian got all instructions for completing work on Flights 1-30 and picked all records and filed. Sent off TWX re Bermuda Flight and wrote up memo on it. Worked with Eileen on April 1 rocket plotting H-SS, H-T, SS-T.

AD,

Sorry to burst your bubble here , but that does not place Dr. Crary anywhere near Roswell on July 7. When you read the rest of his Journal you'll see that they had a Radiosonde Recieving Station at Roswell. Dr. Crary didn't man the Roswell Station.

Here are some more excerpts from Dr. Crary's Journal.

June 5 Thurs. B-17 and most of personnel out to Roswell - recovered
equipment some 25 mi east of Roswell.

June 6 Fri. NYU personnel getting ready for flight tomorrow. Conference about noon, Hachman with radiosonde, Olson and Codbee with receiver to Roswell - also Smith on theodolite.

June 7 Sat. Recordings at north hanger, and at Roswell but plane did not receive.

June 10 Tues. Worked on balloon tests from Roswell - no signals.

Week of 30 June - 5 Julv '47 ( July 2 ?) Stations operating at north hanger, Cloudcroft and Roswell.

[edit on 16-7-2006 by lost_shaman]

Originally posted by Access Denied

Also, these two entries after that show he did go into Roswell on occasion...

Yeah , but that's basically irrelevant as evidenced in the following days Journal entries it's clear he was going on Vacation w/ Family. He had a flat and went on to Roswell to get a tire.

If he hadn't had a flat , he would have driven right on through Roswell on his way to Oklahoma and Roswell wouldn't even have been mentioned in his Journal entry.

Nightwing- never worry about insulting me since I been called worse things by better people than you. As for attaining your altitude well thats just a step down to me.
I have been actively involved in UFO investigations since the 60's even to the point of dukin it out with the "pelicanists" over the Arnold sighting.
Never insinuate that you're better than me. This tends to put me not on defense but on offense.
The AF never conducted a proper investigation and I dare you to prove it. The Condon Report was a sham that was started with a stated agenda. Bluebook while given a chance at success was hijacked by the gummint.
All the evidence available in the Roswell case clearly points to something other than a Mogul flight and this is what this thread is about. Not your attempt at superiority.
There is no way a kitchen table size piece of debri caused the visible damage to the desert landscape reported by the first witness'. Prove otherwise and maybe I'll listen.
As for you and Hal having your own little spat, well thats not relevant to the thread.

And also that an alien craft or a hoax are NOT the only possibilities here.

I agree with this statement.

[edit on 7/16/06 by longhaircowboy]

AD take note of what you quoted-

These obstacles would pull off the lower portions of the train (which includes the radar reflectors) and the remainder of the train would again ascend now that it was free of the weight and restriction.

And this caused the huge gouge in the scenery? Pulleeze. It gets pulled off on the desert scrub. And....wait for it....flies away.
So now ya got a balloon that can't withstand kneehigh brush yet carved a quarter mile gouge and then flew a way leaving tabletop amounts of debris which then filled an apartment.
Is this the story yer stickin with?

longhaircowboy, I apologize more directly, since you seem to be in a food-fight mood. I do not
respond to such baiting tactics. In the event any other participants here mis-understood my remarks,
they are, as always, meant to compliment and encourage those I find who work hard to make such
a discussion worthwhile.

From my FIRST post intro back on page three
"Should have been by a lot sooner. This is as good as ATS UFO discussions get.
Needless to say, KUDOS to Access Denied."

From my SECOND post intro
"Hi Hal, and lost_shaman. You should know I am attracted to any debate that
involves you two because the quality is worth the admission price. "

From my THIRD post intro
"For longhaircowboy, I am not doing this to insult you, but rather to encourage you to gain ever so slightly in
altitude and join the formation of the debate. You are not that far away."

From long habit, I am careful when I disagree with someone I believe either has a chip on their shoulder
or wears their feelings on their sleeve. For any others who may have the same reaction, my posts were intended
to acknowledge that the standards for this debate are being set by Access Denied, Hal9000, and lost_shaman, which
constitute the "formation of the debate". If Gazrok has the time, well, his words from page three speak for themselves.
"Any proper response deserves the same amount of effort the poster put into this" == Gazrok

Gazrok can fly in this formation, regardless of the altitude. He understands that this debate is not going to be biased opinion alone.

longhaircowboy, can you ?

Originally posted by Access Denied

In case you missed it, here it is again...

Remember Tim Printy's biased opinions are not fact's , even if he states them as such.

Here let me point a few things out.

Not a Simple Weather Balloon

"...no one reported seeing hundreds of feet of braided line." (Friedman and Berlinner 197) - Bill Brazel reports finding some string

Bill Brazel reported that it was like Silk Strands and were unbreakable. That doesn't sound anything like 400# test braided lobster twine does it?

roswellproof.homestead.com...

"There was some thread-like material. It looked like silk and there were several pieces of it. It was not large enough to call string, but yet not so small as sewing thread either. To all appearances it was silk, except that it wasn't silk. Whatever it was, it too was a very strong material. You could take it in two hands and try to snap it, but it wouldn't snap at all. Nor did it have strands or fibers like silk thread would have. This was more like a wire--all one piece or substance. In fact, I suppose it could have been a sort of wire--that thought never occurred to me before." - Bill Brazel

Not a Simple Weather Balloon


Professor Moore describes the landing method of these balloon trains. As the balloons burst, the train descended but there were still balloons that were inflated. As the train began to come down to earth, the lower portions of the assembly would drag across the ground and catch on vegetation and rocks. These obstacles would pull off the lower portions of the train (which includes the radar reflectors) and the remainder of the train would again ascend now that it was free of the weight and restriction. This train would repeat this evolution several times.

I guess Tim Printy is a MOGUL Balloon landing expert now, or he's really misconstruing what C. B. Moore actually said.

Here is what C. B. Moore really said from his interview for the Roswell Report.

When something like the idea of a cluster balloon was not
only to carry the weight, but was also to keep the target in the air for a long time.
If one balloon burst, we still would have enough buoyancy for awhile to keep the thing airborne. When it would come to the ground this would drag along the ground and get shredded, but this would still be carried downwind until another balloon would burst, whereupon this one would start getting shredded.

Notice C. B. Moore did not describe at all pieces being pulled off and the Balloon being free of weight restrictions would ascend again, and repeat over and over. He said no such thing!

Not a Simple Weather Balloon

Even Lewis Rickett claims the debris he saw was in a space "...not any bigger than this apartment" (Pflock 77).

Tim Printy neglects to mention that Rickett also said that when he arrived most debris was already gathered , but that there were 25 - 30 Men Guarding the perimeter of the debris field. If the debris field wasn't any bigger than an apartment why the need for 25-30 Men to guard the perimeter of the debris field?

roswellproof.homestead.com...

"The MP's, four or five in the first group, were close to the gouge. There were 25 or 30 others scattered around the perimeter. The Provost Marshall didn't want anyone just wandering up on it." M/SGT. LEWIS RICKETT

Rickett said that when he showed up there were still about 50 pieces of debris scattered around the debris field. If the debris field was that small , then it would have simply been a pile of debris!

Not a Simple Weather Balloon


Of course, this statement is never mentioned in any of the author’s books or comments concerning Rickett.

Seems like we can say the exact same is true for TP's articles.

The Roswell incident did not involve any classified project of the military simply because the military knew nothing of any crash on the Foster ranch until notified by a cvilian. On another note, Project Mogul balloon trains were not classified and their recoveries were of low priority. One Mogul balloon train was vandalized as it was left lying next to a roadway. Another Mogul balloon snagged itself on the roof of a tavern in Flat Bush, New Jersey and was recovered by a policeman. Another Mogul balloon train was recovered by Rancher, Sid West, so he question is where were the cover-up stories for those recoveries?

The fact of the matter is, Project Mogul balloon trains were not classified entities and not one single piece of equipment attributed to a Mogul balloon train was ever recovered on the Foster ranch. Project Mogul balloon flight # 4 was cancelled due to clouds and only a simple service flight with a single sono buoy was launched, not the Mogul balloon train # 4 that Charles Moore claimed was made up similar as Mogul balloon train # 2.

I want to make another note that the suggestion to use a weather balloon rawin device came directly from Washington D.C. , not from Roswell AAF, New Mexico.

[edit on 17-7-2006 by skyeagle409]

Is anyone aware that Project Mogul and Skyhook personnel, including Charles Moore, had contributed to high quality UFO sightintgs over New Mexico? If not, check it out!

roswellproof.homestead.com...

I consider Tim Prinity and his webmaster a joke. I provided him with evidence that no Project Mogul balloon train was involved in the Roswell incident and he thanked me by banning me from his website.

Welcome to the discussion skyeagle409, if you have some links to that info, that would be great.

Here is an article that I find interesting that describes how the "saucer" was not allowed to be photographed, and is described to be 25 feet in diameter.

The Wyoming Eagle, Cheyenne, July 9, p.1
(Headline story)

ONLY MEAGER DETAILS OF FLYING DISC GIVEN
Kite-Like Device Found in N.M.;
Studied by Army
By WILLIAM F. McMENAMIN
-------------------------------
WASHINGTON, July 8, (UP) -- The mystery of the "flying saucers" took a new twist tonight with the disclosure the army air forces has recovered a strange object in New Mexico, and is forwarding it to Wright Field, Dayton, O., for examination.
Announcement of the find came first from the Roswell, N.M., army air base, near where a "saucer" was found three weeks ago.
AAF headquarters later revealed that a "security lid" has been clamped on all but the sketchiest details of the discovery.

Flimsy

AAF spokesmen would say only that the "saucer" was a flimsily-constructed, kite-like object measuring about 25 feet in diameter and covered with a material resembling tinfoil
A telephonic report from Brig. Gen. Roger B. Ramey, commander of the eighth air force at Fort Worth, Tex., said the purposed "saucer" was badly battered when discovered by a rancher at Corona, 75 miles northwest of Roswell, N.M.
Ramey scoffed at the possibility that the object could have been piloted or that it could have obtained the supersonic speeds credited to the "flying saucers" allegedly spotted in recent weeks.
He reported that the object was too lightly constructed to have carried anyone and that there was no evidence that it had had a power plant of any sort.
It bore no identification marks, and Ramey emphasized that no one had seen it in flight.
AAF sources ruled out the possibility that it might have been an army weather-kite. Helium balloons have been used for weather recording for the past seven or eight years.
They said it had been sent to Fort Worth by superfortress for trans-shipment to the AAF experimental center at Dayton.
AAF commanders in New Mexico refused to permit the object to be photographed on the grounds that it was "high level stuff," although Ramey indicated he was not attaching too great importance to the find pending investigation.
The Roswell announcement came from Col. William H. Blanchard, commanding officer of the Roswell army air base, who specifically described the discovery as "a flying disc."
He said the disc had been forwarded to higher headquarters, presumably the commanding general of the 8th air force at Fort Worth, Tex.
Blanchard would reveal no further details.
Sheriff George Wilcox of Roswell said the disc was found about three weeks ago by W. W. Brizell [sic], on the Foster ranch at Corona, 75 miles northwest of Roswell.
Wilcox said that Brizell does not have a telephone and so did not report finding the disc until the day before yesterday. Brizell told the sheriff he didn't know just what the disc was, but that at first it appeared to be a weather meter.
The sheriff's office notified the army, which sent intelligence officers to pick up the object. Then today the army announced possession of a disc.
The sheriff quoted Brizell as saying the object "seemed more or less like tinfoil." The rancher described the disc as about as large as a safe in the sheriff's office.
The safe is about three and one-half by four feet.

roswellproof.homestead.com... (second article)

So the description was given of a 25 foot flimsy object, and it was not allowed to be photographed. But then there is the contradicting description from the sheriff saying Mack said it was as large as a safe, and he thought it was a weather meter.

It’s kind of confusing, but I find it interesting that they weren’t allowed to photograph the "saucer", which means the debris in the photos taken for the press conference was not all the debris recovered.

I don’t think it matches the description of a Mogul balloon, but doesn’t sound like the indestructible material from a UFO either.

Originally posted by skyeagle409

Project Mogul balloon flight # 4 was cancelled due to clouds and only a simple service flight with a single sono buoy was launched, not the Mogul balloon train # 4 that Charles Moore claimed was made up similar as Mogul balloon train # 2.

Hey skyeagle409,

I agree with you.

Charles S. Shneider , MOGUL Project Manager, had been told less than two weeks before the Alamogordo trip on May 20th 1947 by the CAA that MOGUL trains had to be launched in Cloudless Skies. And that NOTAM's (Notice to Airmen) were to be issued.

Dr. Crary's daily Journal clearly states that June 3 Balloon Flight was "abandoned due to cloudy skies" and then again on June 4 that "No Balloon flight again on account of Clouds". Those two entries clearly refer to MOGUL Balloon train flights.

When they do actually launch a MOGUL Balloon Train it is documented clearly in Dr. Crary's Journal. " June 5 Thurs. Up at 4 to shoot 2 charges for balloon flight. Whole assembly of constant-altitude balloons set up at 0500."

Also the Air Force Report cites MOGUL Progress report 6 , sect. II , p. 5 as the basis for the configuration of the supposed MOGUL flights # 3 and # 4 , when it is actually a description of MOGUL Flight # 5 ( the first MOGUL flight at Alamogordo ) as it describes the Radiosonde/Ballast configuration Flight # 5 used.

The Roswell incident is not a myth at all. Thanks to the U.S. Air Force, I found that Mogul balloon flight # 4, which Charles Moore stated was similar to Mogul balloon train #2, had never flown and was cancelled due to clouds. Investigators were also unable to identify any Mogul balloon equipment that was not found on the Foster ranch and checking the wind data for the day of the launch there was no way any balloon would have ended up on the Foster ranch. Besides, Mogul ballon trains were not classified anyway and were often recovered by ordinary civilians with no securtity clearances, such as Rancher, Sid West.

In other words, the Air Force duped the public by claiming that Project Mogul balloon train # 4 was responsible for the Roswell incident when in fact that balloon train never flew and the Air Force knew it.

[edit on 17-7-2006 by skyeagle409]

Originally posted by skyeagle409
The Roswell incident is not a myth at all. Thanks to the U.S. Air Force, I found that Mogul balloon flight # 4, which Charles Moore stated was similar to Mogul balloon train #2, had never flown and was cancelled due to clouds.

Are you talking about Dr. Crary's Daily Journal?

Or other evidence that corroborates Dr. Crary's Daily Journal?

If other can you post that info?

Thank you! Here's some links. Remember, the Air Force said that Project Mogul was secret until recently but that is not true at all. Mogul balloon trains and their missions were revealed back in Jully 1947. Note the photo of the down balloon train and who recovered the object. Also, note the date of the photos. New Jersey was the state where Project Mogul headquarters was located and where one Mogul balloon train was recovered by a policeman after it snagged itself on the roof of a tavern in Flat Bush, New Jersey.

roswellproof.homestead.com...

Originally posted by lost_shaman

Originally posted by skyeagle409

Also the Air Force Report cites MOGUL Progress report 6 , sect. II , p. 5 as the basis for the configuration of the supposed MOGUL flights # 3 and # 4 , when it is actually a description of MOGUL Flight # 5 ( the first MOGUL flight at Alamogordo ) as it describes the Radiosonde/Ballast configuration Flight # 5 used.

Looking at configuations of those Mogul balloon trains, didn't anyone claim that ballast tanks dribblers, sono buoys, etc were recovered on the Foster ranch? The news clipping I provided shows what a downed balloon train really looks like and note that it doesn't resemble anything that was shown in Ramey's office. The balloon train is fully intact and not fragmented over a large area and does not look anything like a downed 'flying saucer.' I also wanted to make a point that rawin devices were tagged with notations: ["Property of the U.S. Government."] In other words, there was no way that Marcel and Cavitt would have confused a downed weather balloon for a 'flying saucer.'

Also, "Mac" Brazel recovered two weather balloons previously and before the Roswell incident broke into the headlines so he was familiar with weather balloons and he also stated that what he had found as not a weather balloon and to further add, there would have been no reason for the military to take him into custody for a week over remains of simple balsa wood and metal foil, stuff that any school-aged child would have been able to identify yet we are being led to believe that military officers of the world's only nuclear-capable Air Wing were unable to identify simple balsa wood and metai foil.

I am familiar with Air Force cover-up techniques because I was once part of an Air Force cover-up but it had nothing to do with UFOs. My plane, an Air Force C-5 Galaxy, was used to transport recovery gear for Korean Airlines, Flt 007 from Cubi Point, Philippines to Yokoto, Japan, which was shot down by the Soviets. I noticed similarities between the cover-up Roswell campaign and the cover-up campaign regarding Flight 007. The Intel folks were telling us (my crew) one thing and what I was reading in the newspapers was a completely different story but it for a good cause because we didn't want the Soviets to know what we knew since both governments were after the aircraft's 'Black Boxes.' If confronted by the media, we were not allowed to tell them the truth.

I am also an UFO believer because I personally witnessed a gigantic UFO over Phan Rang airbase, Vietnam in 1968 and the Air Force covered up that incident as well. The military refer to UFOs in Vietnam as helicopters so the public wouldn't know the real truth. General Brown also made it known that UFOs were also referred to as helicopters.

********************************************************************
Vietnam UFOs

"Brown, a former commander of the 7th Air Force in Southeast Asia, said, "We didn't call them that (UFO's). They could only be seen at night in certain places." Brown said that in the summer of 1968 near the demilitarised zone there was a series of sightings which set off "quite a battle with an Australian destroyer taking a hit"! Astonishingly Brown made it clear that Vietnamese forces were not in any way responsible for the incident."

********************************************************************

So, just as the military covered up the Vietnam UFOs, likewise they did the same in the manner as the Roswell incident.

[edit on 17-7-2006 by skyeagle409]