It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Do you believe the Roswell official explanation?

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:52 AM
link   
The only questions I have are these. Under what circumstances does a person of reasonable intelligence mistake materials such as the ones recovered as a flying saucer. Was the term flying saucer meant to imply something out of this world? Could a knowingly false report of a flying saucer recovery have been part of some kind of social experiment or test of soviet intelligence?




posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:03 AM
link   
Answer to your question...

Absolutely not.

Just so you know...

Do I believe the world is flat?

Absolutely not.

Well then, what do I believe?

Now that is the beginning of a long conversation.




posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Tearman
 


Dear Tearman

This incident at Roswell was the third in about as many weeks.

The first being Kenneth Arnold and the second was an incident that broke a boys arm and killed the dog. People were well aware of the imprecation of a flying disc.

So given that people in the population knew what this meant by a flying disc, the news report from the commander of the most important air force base in the world comes along and says that he has captured one of these flying discs.

Tell me how this could possibly be construed from some baking foil and scotch tape on the desert floor. By professionals at this most important air base. If this had been all there was to the wreckage these people would have been locked away in a white padded room. They would not have gone on to be a 4 star general.

Now as to it being alien that is another argument, but just the fact that they are still lying it is looking that way. After all what military equipment from 1947 made on earth could still be a secret today.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:17 AM
link   
I would offer this explanation, there were two craft that crashed into each other due to outside influences, be it weather, radar or just crashing trying to catch the same magnetic wave. Both crashed and both had survivors. One was the "delta-shaped" and the other "disc-shaped". There is photograph of the delta craft being removed by (i think it was) the 313th Army transport group mentioned in an official communique. In my opinion i think they "lost" both craft, they simply disappeared even though they were well guarded. I think it was highly embarrassing to many levels of government. They had not honored treaties and they lost much of the technology they were willing to kill for. One of the most intriguing pieces of evidence was a "shoe."



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I really dunno what to believe when it comes to this subject to be honest.

On one hand, I kind of believe that it was some top secret Nazi Germany technology that we were testing. This did take place not long after project paperclip after all.

On the other hand, I have a very open mind. So I have never ruled out it being an Alien craft yet.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by CheapShotArtist
 


Dear CheapShotArtist

Being that we all know about project paperclip and have done for a long time, why would it still be worthy of covering up some incident concerning that???

We even know today that there were not only Germany Boffins but Japanese from project 731.

None of this is secret anymore.

Yes there were many reasons back in 1947 for the secret but not in 1997 when they lied again and called it Mogul.

We need to examine the motives.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Well, as I said - There are so many angles with this crash in Roswell. I personally have not ruled out anything yet.

Well, I have ruled out it being a weather balloon but thats about it



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Toxicsurf
Marcel never recanted his story that it wasn't "sticks, tape, tinfoil etc".
What????? In fact in the interview attached he compares it to the foil in a pack of cigarettes! So his description sure sounds like foil!

Marcel's story is that it wasn't a weather balloon, and he was right, it wasn't a weather balloon. So there was no need to recant that claim.

He always described debris that sounds just like mogul. Like in this interview, it sounds just like mogul debris, metal no thicker than foil out of a pack of cigarettes: Hardly the construction one would expect for an interplanetary spacecraft. But exactly the description I'd expect for a radar reflector target, some thin, lightweight metal foil.




Originally posted by Tearman
The only questions I have are these. Under what circumstances does a person of reasonable intelligence mistake materials such as the ones recovered as a flying saucer. Was the term flying saucer meant to imply something out of this world?
The term used was "disk" not flying saucer. The answer is in the post I made on page 1:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
"flying disks" were in the news every day so when the rancher Brazel found some debris he wondered if it was from one of the disks everyone was talking about.

From "The Roswell Report" p11:

What was later characterized as “the UFO Wave of 1947” began with 16 alleged sightings that occurred between May 17 and July 12,1947 (although some researchers claim there were as many as 800 sightings during that period). Interestingly, the “Roswell Incident” was not considered one of these 1947 events until the 1978-1980 time frame.

p30:

it seems that there was overreaction by Colonel Blanchard and Major Marcel in originally reporting that a “flying disc” had been recovered when, at that time, nobody knew for sure what that term even meant, since it had only been in use for a couple of weeks.
Yes, it was a brand new term, and in the news every day, so people hearing or reading the news were thinking about "disks".

Even the FBI used the term "disk" referring to a hexagonal object (radar reflectors might be described as hexagonal) attached to a balloon:

p22:

the description of the “flying disc” was consistent with a document routinely used by most pro-UFO writers to indicate a conspiracy in progress-the telegram from the Dallas FBI office of July 8,1947. This document quoted in part states: “. . The disc is hexagonal in shape and was suspended from a balloon by a cable, which balloon was approximately twenty feet in diameter. the object found resembles a high altitude weather balloon with a radar reflector... disc and balloon being transported ...”
So the term disk was being used a lot, perhaps overused, applying to six sided objects attached to balloons.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by SaosinEngaged
 


For the sake of argument , let's assume the witnesses all saw crash-test dummies .

Why would the AF say it was a 'weather balloon' ? And why did it take them decades before they came forward with the crash-test dummies explanation ?

I aint buying any of that .



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


So , how do the dummies relate to the weather balloon ?

And , why do you suppose the guy waited 4 decades to recant his story ?



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by okbmd
 
The Air Force never claimed the dummies and the mogul balloon were related to the same event, which you would know if you had read their reports.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


No , I have not read the reports . That's why I asked you , as you seem to be a lot more familiar with all of this than I am .

Why do you suppose the guy waited that long to change his story ?



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:26 AM
link   
U.S Govt. spin doctor , explaining the facts...



..... and official photo of what is OBVIOUSLY a weather balloon thingy



( images c/- Lee Harvey Roswell ... and www 123rf.com )



[edit on 12-8-2010 by radarloveguy]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by okbmd
Why do you suppose the guy waited that long to change his story ?
Which guy are you referring to, have you got a name? Anyway I'm not sure the case hinges on the testimony of any one person. There were multiple witnesses to the crash debris field at Foster ranch, here's a list of the witnesses that saw "TOUGH, FLEXIBLE, FOIL-LIKE MATERIAL, WITH MEMORY":

roswellproof.homestead.com...

And as you can see they don't even all agree with each other on the properties of the foil. There are similar lists for the sticks etc.


[edit on 12-8-2010 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:35 AM
link   
wrong thread

[edit on 12-8-2010 by and14263]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:13 AM
link   
Although I do believe in UFO's/Aliens, I'm on the fence about Roswell.

To take another approach...what could have been discovered that was important enough to cover up?

My answer...Stealth.

The timeline actually fits too.

Given how young radar was, and how massive an impact it had been proven to have, I can see some general being willing to let ANY story run as long as the Russkie's didn't get wind of a radar target that didn't reflect radar.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:30 AM
link   
s914.photobucket.com... I think you might agree that these parts recovered from the Roswell disc crash are much more substantial than "foil" and that all three control panels are designed for beings with five fingers and a thumb. There were at least three films and three still photographs made.

[edit on 053131p://am3127 by debris765nju]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by debris765nju
s914.photobucket.com... I think you might agree that these parts recovered from the Roswell disc crash are much more substantial than "foil" and that all three control panels are designed for beings with five fingers and a thumb. There were at least three films and three still photographs made.

[edit on 053131p://am3127 by debris765nju]




That tape was a Reproduction of alien control panels found at the crash site
based on eyewitness descriptions.
to my knowledge not the actual thing.

But there is some confusion those panels are really from the Aztec New Mexico crash site in 1948 as well.
www.ufoevidence.org...

Or the Laredo Texas Crash "Tomatoe Man"
www.ufoevidence.org...



Im not buying the Nazi/paperclip explanation nor Stealth either. It is common knowledge the USAF tried to replicate with no success disc shaped vehicles. That paperclip is not a secret or ex NAZI scientists in nasa. Even the stealth technology was declassified in the Mid 80's. It does not take 50 years to come clean with such a technology and the Air Force sketchy approach and explanations, changing story, intimidating witnesses at roswell ect. I have never seen our military go to such measures to cover anything up like the roswell & corona crash. The ends simply do not justify the means behind the secrecy to this day. So the USAF shot itself in the foot from the beginning with the cover up and was never able to undo what was already done.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by Unknown Soldier]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
I have never seen our military go to such measures to cover anything up like the roswell & corona crash. The ends simply do not justify the means behind the secrecy to this day.
What measures? Claiming a big balloon was really a little weather balloon so the soviets wouldn't wonder what the big balloon was for? That doesn't seem like such an extreme measure to me, in fact it wasn't an issue from 1947 to about 1978 or so.

And I noticed the people yakking about getting threatened are still alive to talk about it. Would they threaten somebody about talking about a top secret balloon project? Maybe, but I don't see why that's so strange. It had the same classification as the atomic bomb and I could imagine them threatening anyone against talking about that.

Look it was a great mystery before 1994, when we all knew they were lying based on Marcel's description of the debris field containing too much material for a weather balloon, and Marcel was right. It just doesn't seem like a mystery since 1994 though, everything adds up.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   
i remember seeing a documentary recently, the photgraph showing the officer(is it Marcell) crouching down next to the weather ballon holding a piece of paper. This paper was analysed and enhanced digitally, the result was that the paper has the words to the effect of 'the disk has been recovered'...

how they going to explain that one!



new topics




 
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join