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: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by debris765nju
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


The Aztec crash is a complete fabrication. I have been to that site, been to the Roswell sites as well. The Aztec crash was supposed to have been buried "in situ" because it was too radioactive to be moved. The land features a low escarpment and unaltered landscape. There is a unpaved washboard road below and another along the ridge of the escarpment and there is the "alien run" bicycle course along the escarpment. There is zero possibility of heavy equipment ever being brought in or used to bury a 100 foot diameter UFO. My opinion is it was fabricated to take the heat off Roswell. You might notice that the parts are in a tent on folding tables, couldn't be Aztec because of the inclination of the land. I drove thousands of miles to get there and i really wanted to find evidence of a crash. I was diappointed.

[edit on 013131p://pm3126 by debris765nju]


Good points, that could very well be. Im saying those panels could have been reproductions of eye witness testimony of those 2 other supposed crashes, still unclear. I dont know perhaps that video is the real deal but it looks like the video was done in some crappy machine shop. Not some lab or what you would expect if you have some super technology you would have it in a well lighted laboratory. Im sure I read somewhere a while back those panels were reproductions and the video was a hoax. I think I recall that they had them on sale on ebay at some point. And to my knowledge the greys do NOT have 5 gingers. They have 4.




posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
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.


This was the 1940's we are talking about here,the military is much more PC today than what it use to be. All these people just making up something like that? Accusing our military of threats? These people im sure loves their country and to make an accusation like that is not easy thing to do. Why would they make it up?
I don't know how you got I thought they were making it up from that, I happen to believe they may have received some threats about it, and I explained why, and it's not because of a flying saucer.

However while I can believe the threat claims, we can't believe all the claims made simply because not even the witnesses who saw the foil agree on what the properties of the "magical foil" was, but we have a videotaped interview of Marcel comparing the foil to the foil in a pack of cigarettes. And even Marcel and Marcel Jr didn't agree on the shape of the sticks, the son recalls them as I-beam shaped. But it's still basically sticks and very thin foil we are talking about.

Why did Marcel think it was other-worldly foil? Who knows, but I suspect it's a result of confabulation from the fact that he knew we were being lied to in the official story about the weather balloon, so he figured they had something to hide, which they did, it just wasn't extraterrestrial in nature.


NO it is no longer a mystery... obvious a saucer with bodies crashed. Yes it adds up especially since the 1997 crash test dummies excuse. Which was a lie


The lying was done by mortician Glenn Denniss, he's the guy who lied about a nurse called Naomi Maria Self seeing bodies, and even his own friend doesn't believe his story anymore after they found out there was never a nurse by that name, at which point Dennis admitted he was lying about the nurse, her name at least. So that's why nobody believes him anymore. And he's the founder of the International UFO Museum and Research Center in Roswell so he had financial reason to get people to his museum.

Other than the lying description of bodies by Glenn Dennis, what other evidence do we have for bodies in 1947? Anyone else who claims there were bodies in 1947 can't seem to present any evidence for them but if you've got some please enlighten me, I've never seen that. Until I see evidence for bodies in 1947 other than the lies of Glenn dennis, why would I even care about the crash test dummies? The air force doesn't claim they happened in 1947 and they didn't so I think you're confusing it with the 1947 Roswell case, which is basically what the Air Force is claiming, and as far as I can tell based on lack of evidence for any bodies in 1947, they're right.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 07:47 AM
link   
there was a movie, a documentary which pretty much described the material from Roswell...they even made a animation of that metal like material...i will try to find it and post it here

good thread



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
I sort of believe the final version of the government.
At the time the government thought it would be more valuable to keep their spying secretes a secrete and say the incident was a UFO.
They didn't expect the stir it made so they had to back track off of the UFO story and create another one.
It took 40 years and the end of the cold war to tell the truth on that day.

Just like now all the black projects that are floating in the sky, they just let the people believe it's UFO's because it easier for the government to cover their secrete projects though the UFO camouflage.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by mysteryskeptic
 


Dear mysteryskeptic

From mysteryskeptic “Just like now all the black projects that are floating in the sky, they just let the people believe it's UFO's because it easier for the government to cover their secrete projects though the UFO camouflage”

I have read this statement so may time I just have to say something about it.

Over the past few years we have had very credible witnesses seeing flying craft that are a mile long.

Now if these things are US military craft, then as a US citizens you should be out raged at them hiding the tech that this implies. Too the point were revolution should have happened years ago.

It is your TAX dollars that are paying for this if that is the case and the US people are not getting the benefit that this implies.

It means you are living is a reality that they have created purely to exploit you.

Too me this is way more to be feared than the possibility of ET being here who as far as we know is leaving us alone.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


No, I believe that it is a wather balloon experiment. Now, I do believe first contact is that los angeles "battle of 1942" was a really un explained sighting.It wasnt a japanese bomb balloon. on the roswell case. There is proof that it was indeed a weather balloon.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by MuscleRocker
 


Dear MuscleRocker

From MuscleRocker “There is proof that it was indeed a weather balloon.”

I would love to see that proof.

Anyway in that you believe that, you are also saying that you believe that they put people with the IQ of a village idiot in charge of the most powerful air base in the world.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by MuscleRocker
 


Umm. I agree with you on the BOLA incident but I have not seen any conclusive evidence it was a balloon. I'm pretty open minded to looking at things objectively and with Roswell, there is a mountain of evidence that points to a UFO. Just my opinion mind ya.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 10:37 PM
link   
I believe that the first official statement was the correct explanation of what crashed at Roswell,that indeed it was a craft not from earth,I think that they made Jesse Marcel look like a incompetent fool to know what he saw,i do not believe in the explanation of a balloon,why the great big denial all of sudden,why the sudden change in the report,my belief



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:20 AM
link   
The first report is pretty huge. I would just like to agree with those who also think so. How can you argue against that piece of evidence?

Asians in Gandolas? Why would that be covered up still? Nice try...

Nazi's? Why would modern day Germany cover up their secret military craft from 1947. Sorry from what I've learned by meeting people from Germany is that they are not Nazi's. And they do as much as they can to not be labeled as Nazi's. So why would Germany cover their Nazi craft?!?! Nazi's secretly run Germany still? First of all think of how much money they would of made by releasing it, if it was real, I mean give me a break, maybe they had some top secret technology.

But not at Roswell.

Clearly Alien craft, with occupants. The evidence is overwhelming. Ahh, where is the hard evidence, you would basically have to shoot your way through to the hard evidence, and you would be shooting on the US Army. So impossible.

And how do you gather Alien evidence?

What if there is a cover up of the leaked out evidence? The Roswell remains and occupants?

Prior sightings, crash sites, who came in to recover the craft, who was involved, reports made, eye witness accounts, newspaper stories, radio, television, the Government's reaction, that is what we have.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by game over man
 


The Nazi efforts into technology advancement and what they actually did produce, was amazing. I think no one will argue that. I have always thought of the possiblity regarding the "german andle" in Roswell. If anything, I don't know but I have always found it suspect that during that time window it is a fact that the Germans were experiementing with the UFO craft technology & possible uses. And then a UFO goes down in Roswell?!

Ummmmmm



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by game over man
 


The Nazi efforts into technology advancement and what they actually did produce, was amazing. I think no one will argue that. I have always thought of the possiblity regarding the "german andle" in Roswell. If anything, I don't know but I have always found it suspect that during that time window it is a fact that the Germans were experiementing with the UFO craft technology & possible uses. And then a UFO goes down in Roswell?!

Ummmmmm


Right I know what you mean, agree with you.

But I can garuntee I can find on Google right now political and social motives and agenda that will prove in no way shape or form that Modern Day Germany takes any pride in Adolf Hitler, Nazi's, Concentration Camps, the Persucution of Jews, The Holocaust, the SS, etc...

Therefore imo, it would be in the Germans best interest along long time ago to reveal the craft. OR ANY "COOL" stuff they might have, to make peace with the rest of the world, hello?!?! If it was a Nazi UFO, there is nothing in the News since 1947 that reveals anything of the sort. Lay out your conspiracy theories. I bet there is more of an effort in unity than anything. And evidence of the US trying to take over the World....relatively speaking.

If the German Nazi UFO Crashed at Roswell, and is still covered up, then Nazi's are still running Germany, there is a secret Nazi Agenda, I mean honestly that is not the case. It's late I cannot research right now, but I garuntee, there is proof of what I'm talking about.

Roswell, CLEARLY ALIEN.

Honestly what countries represent at the ISS?
and
Out of all the movies about The Holocaust how come not one, atleast a cornball movie, about Nazi Ufo's?? Sorry debunked...

Roswell, CLEARLY ALIEN.

*awaits Nazi 2012 theory



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   
I personally don't believe anything the government has to say about almost anything, especially with this. All those people, what they saw, what they heard, all the first hand, eye witness accounts all of it. None of that matters because the government says so.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by njh1988]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
This story also puts in my mind of the great links the US will go to keep ufos and alien crashes underwraps,Take the case of Thomas Mantel if spelled correctly,a highly trained fighter pilot chasing a ufo with other pilots in his squad the others turn back he radios and tells flight control he is still going after it,his plane goes down and he dies,now the official report on that by his commanders is he lost his life chasing the planet Venus? The Rendlesham incident again highly trained military personal reporting a ufo sighting and they were swept under the rug to,so i don't take the goverment to be on the up and up about anything JMO



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


It seems that based on the first Roswell Daily Record article re. the incident, that it was a representative of RAAF that described the 'object' recovered variously as a flying saucer or disk, although perhaps it was the article's author who manufactured the description, (the term, after all, having been an invention of the press, so they say). My question should not have been 'does the term flying saucer carry otherworldy connotations', but instead, would they have used this term if they hadn't meant to imply something otherworldy? Was there any reason at all to connect the discovery of this wreckage with the flying saucer flap that had apparently been underway over the past few days? Were they just getting caught up in the hysteria?

[edit on 17-8-2010 by Tearman]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tearman
Was there any reason at all to connect the discovery of this wreckage with the flying saucer flap that had apparently been underway over the past few days? Were they just getting caught up in the hysteria?
Was there any reason to connect the discovery of this wreckage with the flying saucer flap? Do you mean a logical reason, or any reason at all?

I think a careful read of that newspaper article says it best:


Originally posted by Arbitrageur

www.ufologie.net...


The next day he first heard about the flying disks, and he wondered if what he had found might be the remnants of one of these.


So does that answer your question? The rancher finds wreckage, the next day he hears about flying disks, and wonders if the wreckage he found is from one of those. I don't know how much more clearly it can be spelled out than that.


Monday he came to town to sell some wool and while here he went to see Sheriff George Wilcox and "whispered kinda confidential like" that he might have found a flying disk.


So he starts referring to it as possibly a flying disk, and the name sticks because the air force is calling it a disk, the FBI is calling it a disk, even though there IS NO DISC!


Then Major Marcel brought it to Roswell and that was the last he heard until the story broke that he had found a flying disk.

Brazel said that he did not see it fall from the sky and did not see it before it was torn up, so he did not know the size or shape it might have been, but he thought it might have been as large as a table top. The balloon which held it up, if that is how it worked, must have been about 12 feet long, he felt, measuring the distance by the size of the room in which he sat. The rubber was smoke gray in color and scattered over an area about 200 yards in diameter.


So when I see him talking about a balloon, I know balloons can't go past the Earth's atmosphere. But I don't know if Brazel knew that or not. So I really can't answer whether or not he was thinking it might be an other-worldly balloon, but he was talking about a balloon which he thought was about 12 feet long.

He knew it wasn't a weather balloon:

Brazel said that he had previously found two weather observation balloons on the ranch but that what he found this time did not in any way resemble either of these.

"I am sure that what I found was not any weather observation balloon,"
and of course Marcel said the same thing about being sure it was not a weather balloon, and they were both right it wasn't. For one thing the 12 foot long balloon the rancher talked about is much larger than a weather balloon, they aren't 12 feet long.

Does this answer your question? I recommend reading that newspaper article over at least 5 times, take some time between each reading and let it sink in, it really tells a lot about how the whole Roswell mythos got started if you read it carefully, such as the usage of the term "disc" when there wasn't any disc, at least not what we would call a disc.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 



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


what do you mean 'might be described as'....


the data reads....


FBI DALLAS 7-8-47 6-17 PM DIRECTOR AND SAC, CINCINNATI URGENT FLYING DISC, INFORMATION CONCERNING. MAJOR CURTAN, HEADQUARTERS EIGHTH AIR FORCE, TELEPHONICALLY ADVISED THIS OFFICE THAT AN OBJECT PURPORTING TO BE A FLYING DISC WAS RE COVERED NEAR ROSWELL, NEW MEXICO, THIS DATE. THE DISC IS HEXAGONAL IN SHAPE AND WAS SUSPENDED FROM A BALLON BY A CABLE, WHICH BALLON WAS APPROXIMATELY TWENTY FEET IN DIAMETER. MAJOR CURTAN FURTHER ADVISED THAT THE OBJECT FOUND RESEMBLES A HIGH ALTITUDE WEATHER BALLOON WITH A RADAR REFLECTOR, BUT THAT TELEPHONIC CONVERSATION BETWEEN THEIR OFFICE AND WRIGHT FIELD HAD NOT xxxxxxxxxx BORNE OUT THIS BELIEF. DISC AND BALLOON BEING TRANSPORTED TO WRIGHT FIELD BY SPECIAL PLANE FOR EXAMIN INFORMATION PROVIDED THIS OFFICE BECAUSE OF NATIONAL INTEREST IN CASE xxxx AND FACT THAT NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY, ASSOCIATED PRESS, A OTHERS ATTEMPTING TO BREAK STORY OF LOCATION OF DISC TODAY. MAJOR CURTAN ADVISED WOULD REQUEST WRIGHT FIELD TO ADVISE CINCINNATI OFFICE RESULTS OF EXAMINATION. NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED.


foia.fbi.gov...



Where did Ramey get proper obscure term and shape description for a radar target?--probably scripted by military intelligence or counterintelligence

The term RAWIN in "DEM/RAWIN" was a meteorological jargon term for a RAdar WINd target. Not only was Gen. Ramey telling the press he thought the rubble in his office might be a weather balloon and radar target, he obviously knew it was judging, among other things, through his use of proper terminology. Later bringing in a weather officer (Irving Newton) for official identification was obviously just for show.

In addition, Ramey and his minions were describing the shape of the RAWIN targets as "hexagonal" (such as in the FBI telegram out of Dallas and Reuter's stories). The problem here is that a radar target might only be so described by somebody looking at the outline of a fully assembled and intact target directly from the top or bottom. But all Ramey had to look at was a torn-up target with pieces laying on the ground. It is quite impossible to deduce a "hexagonal" shape in such a state. So where did Ramey get the "hexagonal" shape description? Not from weather officer Newton, who came in later and instead called it a "six-pointed star". Only somebody quite familiar with intact radar targets might refer to them as "hexagonal", so apparently Ramey was provided the "hexagonal" RAWIN description as part of a prepared script, again possibly from counterintelligence or intelligence. (see Ramey's impossible hexagon story for details)


www.roswellproof.com...



moreover in regards to fbi's involvement....


Mr. (name blacked out) also discussed this matter with Colonel L.R. Forney of MID (Military Intelligence Division). Colonel Forney indicated that it is his attitude that inasmuch as it has been established that the flying disks are not the result of any Army or Navy experiments, the matter is of interest to the FBI.


www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I frankly don't see how anyone can listen to Marcel's description of the debris and not conclude it's project mogul


i suppose you are referring to the infamous mogul flight #4.... in other words charles moore's hallucinations....


The number 4 flight of this experimental balloon MOGUL, the only one which could have landed near the ranch at the time….never went up.

That’s right. MOGUL Flight 4 was never launched. That is according to notes taken on that day. IT WAS A NO LAUNCH DAY BECAUSE OF BAD WEATHER JUST LIKE THE DAY BEFORE.


ufomedia.blogspot.com...



Originally posted by Arbitrageur
The Air Force report by its own admission is incomplete.


is full of holes would sound more appropriate.....



which allegedly consisted of...



"the box kite"... which came to be known as the "flying disk"...


something like this....



n the 'material' DEBRIS being the radar reflectors ONLY...

which SURPRISE SURPRISE..... they still have an original piece left....






but what about the rest of the material....





aahhh.... sheridan cavitt had described a black box in the wreckage...


Moore succeeded in locating him and visiting his house for an interview. However, Cavitt refused to talk about the incident. Years later he also refused to talk to Randle and Schmidt. However, he did talk to the Air Force invesigator and the story below is what he claimed actually happened. The astute reader will realize that Cavitt's testimony is about as solid as a Swiss cheese (full of holes).


www.nicap.org...


but according to mogul expert richard muller @ around the one hour mark....



the microphones were suspended via springs inside the 'disks'..... whilst the radar reflectors sent back the data that was being 'heard'...



then we have the balloon design contradictions.....

left only with drawings for flight#2..



which along with flights # 4 & 9 are missing in the reports....



The difficulty in reconstructing flight 4 was that aside from a diary entry, there was little information on where it flew, and only hints as to what tracking devices were on the flight. The latter was important, as radars, sonobuoys and theodolites were used initially for tracking Mogul flights, only to be later discarded in favour of radiosondes as flights proved to drift well beyond the circa 40-mile tracking range of radar. Records for other flights exist, and they show that flight 2 had rawin reflectors for radar tracking, but flight 5 had a radiosonde. Moore deduced that the fact that flight 4 was lost strongly suggested that flight 5’s use of a radiosonde for tracking was a direct result of the inability to track flight 4 with radar. Of course, if flight 4 didn’t have radar reflectors, it could not have been the source of the debris on the Foster ranch.

en.wikipedia.org...

but according to af report.... attachment #27 - table no.7 (summary of nyu constant-level balloon flights)...

flight#5 was launched on 5th june 1947... i.e. having a gap of ONLY one day with flight#4 @ june 4....


which brings us to the conclusion... that moore's 'deductions' have no basis in reality....


on the contrary.... flight#4 was more likely to have had a radiosonde...


Professor Moore also commented: "Flight Number 4 was launched on June 4 (1947) and it was tracked by the B-17 and by the radar



well... www.project1947.com...

n finally... when the af was asked why they thought they saw disks....



they show clips of payloads from nasa's experiments of 1972....



:hey



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
I've never seen evidence that would lead me to believe anything more than a Army Air Corp balloon crashed in southeastern New Mexico in 1947. I've read the books on this subject from "believers" and the USAF and I think the MOGUL Project is the best explanation. I think many of the so-called witness confused many separate events when interviewed twenty and sometimes thirty years later. I also think several prominent witnesses were engaged in deliberate embellishing (or outright lying) for financial or personal reasons. The fact that many of the witnesses have changed their stories so many times in the past decades should cause us to question the entire myth.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Turiddu
 


I couldn't agree more. The sheer amount of things that clearly don't add up that one has to overlook in order to believe what they want to believe gives me great pause.

While I don't buy the official government explanation (only due to the poor record keeping and time that has passed) I can't overlook the things necessary for me to believe it was an alien crash either.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by mcrom901
they show clips of payloads from nasa's experiments of 1972....
Excellent post! And well-sourced I might add!

Obviously the government had second thoughts about their screwup in 1994 when they said the case had been solved.

The Roswell Files; Why Would The Government Waste Time Exposing Ufos If There Wasn't Something To All The Stories?


End of story, the Air Force said. ``This is our final response to the Roswell nonsense,'' the Air Force said in 1994.

But that was before someone found further evidence lying on a coffee table in the White House near the first family's private quarters that would explain the cover-up rumors.

The report was turned over to the Air Force, which issued a new and improved final report saying that life-size dummies were used in high-altitude parachute drops from 1954 to 1959 as part of Air Force projects code-named High Dive and Excelsior.

People near Roswell obviously mistook the crash dummies for extraterrestrials.


So much for the "final report" in 1994 which explained everything. They realized what a mistake they had make and decided they needed to keep the UFO conspiracy alive in 1997 by issuing another report where the dates don't even match up:


STOP. Just hold everything.

The crash that drew everyone's suspicion was in 1947. But notice how the dummy drop didn't occur until 1954.

BINGO.

Obviously, by releasing dates that don't add up and don't begin to explain what really happened, the government is hoping to keep the conspiracy alive.
And the discrepancy you show of showing clips from 1972 for an event that happened 25 years later is even more of a discrepancy than the dummy drops which only happened about 6+ years later.

It wouldn't surprise me if officials had some reasons for keeping the Roswell UFO conspiracy alive though I can't say I agree with the reasons cited by the author of the link I just posted.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by Arbitrageur]




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join