This is a funny question...but can someone repy to my posts...

I'm not trying to be rude, honestly, just wondering if anyone "see" my posts at all.

I've had lots of computer trouble lately so i wouldn't be surprised if somethings "screwy".

A reply would be GREATLY appreciated and VERY reassuring

Thankyou

AoN

gentlemen/ladies: after reading the compositional analysis and test results

i believe imho that this object was originally a piece of 360 aluminum alloy

altho the absense of tin is interesting; the tear drop shape can be

duplicated by super-heating the alloy and then dropping it from an extreme

height; the other points of interest is the detection of magnetic effects

(which you do not get from cast aluminum alloy) (see video) and the alleged

exposure of the x-ray film by the object; therefore said object must have

a radioactive element somewhere within its internal matrix. i am very

familiar with different types and compositions of alloys and tool grade

materials,casting by-products and slag; this sample is way too pure to be

from a meteorite or organic ore. if not for the electro-magnetic feild

reading and the radiation trace i would say it is just a piece of scrap 360a

that melted at a high altitude and fell to earth, which is interesting in itself;

perhaps a piece of the alleged nuclear-powered craft the usaf alledgely

has that was alledgedly involved in the Cash/Landrum case?

mikesingh,keep digging brother

I think it's some sort of metal thing that turned to that shape due to coming into our atmosphere..

As I remember the story this guy saw the UFO take off and this dripped from the bottom of it. It glowed orange. He went to pick it up with something and said it cooled quickly. I don't know if I would have even got close to it without a geiger counter and a radiation suit.

When I first saw pics of the object in the original post, I couldnt help but think of this




A purely terrestrial object but it might shed some light on how something like the original could come to be.

[edit on 13-12-2007 by punkinworks]

Originally posted by Springer
I am friends with a friend of COLM KELLEHER , I can ask if Colm ever responded and if not why. I'll update this thread.

I remember this case but don't remember what came of it. I'll find out.

Springer...

Thanks Springer! Hope you get a communication soon.

Cheers!

Nice job mike, I think you're on to something... the feds must have saw this and deleted your pic!

I dunno if its my comp but it worked earlier now its not.

Either way nice find, I have not heard about this till now. Get Bob on here we should ask him personally.

Originally posted by jmilla
Either way nice find, I have not heard about this till now. Get Bob on here we should ask him personally.

Good idea jmilla! BUT how the devil does one get through to him? I've tried, but there doesn't seem to be any email address where we can contact him directly. Wonder if anyone here can try? Nothing like a one-to-one!

Cheers!

This is a really interesting subject not helped, IMO, by the original insistence that it’s proof positive of alien UFOs visiting Earth.

The two pieces of evidence I saw cited as proof of extraterrestrial origin aren’t proof at all; neither Mars-like strontium isotope ratios nor thermal neutron emissions are strange on Earth.

I’ve found the actual written data hard to locate. A proper, non-hysterical, non-sensationalist publication of the data would help a great deal.

It’s interesting that many people have theories about this object that relate to their background. It’s no different to the explanations I hear in my day job. Chemists put forward chemical explanations, engineers engineering ones and physicists physical ones. No surprise.

I was also struck by the similarity of the object’s appearance to petrified wood, fulgurites, human hair and a host of other natural phenomena but the compelling explanation that is consistent with White’s story is of an object melting due to friction in the atmosphere and fast air flow over its surface.

I wonder if a lot of the exotic appearance of the object isn’t due to the melting and re-crystallisation?

Two key facts which shouldn’t be ignored are the emission of gamma or X-rays and the EMF. Both of these would be consistent with an atomic battery, wouldn’t they? Certainly, gamma rays shouldn’t be emitted by any decent battery but this one is damaged and may, in its intact state, have contained the photons.

One thing that wasn’t clear to me was how much of the object was sampled to determine its composition. EDX, which is mentioned, is a surface technique. The 3-D technique showed the object had a core-shell structure but didn’t shed any light on the composition. If the elemental analysis is only from surface techniques or samples taken at the surface, what’s to say that the core of the object is also close to aluminium 360?

I might have missed something there. Please put me right if I have.

Finally, my thoughts on the origin of this object. Association with a UFO sighting and a similar instance in the 1940s suggest to me that these objects originate from black project aircraft.