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.

 

The Ramey Memo: Best Roswell Evidence Ever Found

page: 7
106
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:13 AM
link   
This thread reminds me of those folks that see things in moon rocks and such. Like seeing Scooby Doo in the clouds, only as mature adults we now understand they are just water vapor.

I think it is fair to say, and this thread MORE than points this out CLEARLY, that the limited visual information presented allows people to see or recognize any pattern they are inclined to. Making the whole thing a big exercise in utter futility.

I wish we had a better photo, so we wouldn't have to battle people's religious like faith when it comes to discussing this, but as anything UFO related, there always seems to be a major problem with the evidence that allows folks to take it either way. How convenient. Now, if I can only get bigfoot or the loch ness monster to stay still for 10 damn seconds so I can take a photo that doesn't come out blurry.....lol....




posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Monts
 


This just makes me think even more that there IS something to legends and stories.

When you think about it, if the same stories persist for years and years, multiple people corroborate similar testaments, maybe just maybe there is an ounce of truth in it.

Just like the comedian Katt Williams says, " if people say you're a crack . for more than ten years, you're most likely smoking crack!"



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts
 


I understand where you are coming from...

It seems that any time there isn't a "clear answer", people from both sides of the victory claim victory.

As much as I'd like to think that his memo is the "smoking gun", I've realized that there is no way on earth that any kind of translation of the memo could offer any kind of definitive proof.

As you said, there is always a "catch" when it comes to the UFO subject that keeps the truth a blur, and keeps the real answer an unsolvable mystery.

Unfortunately, people like to come to their own conclusions in such situations, and that is where things get ugly as people tend to think that they are right... even though they could most certainly be wrong.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhiteDevil013
reply to post by Monts
 


This just makes me think even more that there IS something to legends and stories.

When you think about it, if the same stories persist for years and years, multiple people corroborate similar testaments, maybe just maybe there is an ounce of truth in it.

Just like the comedian Katt Williams says, " if people say you're a crack . for more than ten years, you're most likely smoking crack!"


The only problem is that testaments aren't considered a reliable source of evidence in the UFO study. It is somewhat understandable, seeing as how there are no doubt hoaxers and charlatans who will twist and use their created false truths as bait for the weak. Such actions really detract the "credibility" of such sources of information... unfortunately.

I just think that it is extremely unlikely that in all the witness statements, testimonies, and books that have published, ALL of them are either quacks, hoaxers, or mis-informed in some manner. I think it is highly likely that at there is some truth in some of the statements... but never forget the power of disinformation.

As I've mentioned before... witness testimony is used as evidence in courts of law... so why can't they be used the same way in the UFO-ET-Reality debate?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 05:21 AM
link   
great vid
enjoyed it immensely
star & flag



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


Arrogance doesn't really do justice as a descriptor of your attitude. How the hell do you know the age of the 'ignorant believers'???

There's a couple of things a person like you could be doing on a forum like this - but maybe you are simply an arrogant and unpleasant person in life, professing wisdom when displaying foolishness...


EDIT TO ADD - Interestingly, Arbitraeger hasn't replied to either of the comments I posted in response to his. Funny that when he's been called out for changing his tack (for approaching the debunk from two different perspectives which contradict each other), he seems to shy away from responding.

Also interesting to note the posts which punctuate actual debate in this thread - "speculation" ignorant believers" etc, which add nothing to the discussion. Sounds like unintelligent Plant Life to me.








edit on 27-12-2010 by FlyInTheOintment because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Monts
 


Very good point,. Always makes me laugh that the military could employ so many mentally unbalanced people to guard and operate the nuclear defence programs, the airspace defence and detection programs and so forth. Very curious that the minute someone retires from the military they are no longer trustworthy and are somehow 'damaged goods' when it comes to the credibility of their testimonies. Curious.

No pics, no evidence! No camera footage - national security of course! Testimony counts for nothing! Give him the death penalty on the basis of the witness testimony!

Smoke and Mirrors.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Read this if you really want to see a lot of the connections made. (long read though)...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

As for Majestic, going from the alleged documents, the acronym for the group was MAJIC (Military Assessment Joint Intelligence Committee). Remember, at this time, they hadn't yet reorganized and centralized intel. The National Security Act was months later, though same year.

The memo is good evidence, but it's legibility (or lack thereof) kind of prevents it from being the "smoking gun" as advertised. Still though, there is enough clarity on some points, to make a real strong case just by itself, and when coupled with the other information, it just reinforces that we recovered something of an otherworldly origin near Roswell back then.


As I've mentioned before... witness testimony is used as evidence in courts of law... so why can't they be used the same way in the UFO-ET-Reality debate?


Sure they are, but even in court, you use them WITH other information, to corroborate the story. That's where UFOlogy often comes up short, in the other evidence to help corroborate, and it's why Roswell is so important, in that we have other evidence, besides testimony, to build the case.
edit on 27-12-2010 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 



i don't think the last letter is a "G" , also using a word such as the viewing in sentence logic is kind've odd,
i'm thinking it could be remains, but the second letter seems to be an "i"
victims seems to be the best match-up so far ,
it would be interesting if we knew the font to recreate the picture in the same conditions and then compare, kind of hard though as you'd need to take into account camera type, distance ,lighting and paper angle,



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   
The best evidence in the case is right there in the photos, but it isn't the memo.

It's the FACT that they crated up the debris (which they claim is Mogul flight 4) and flew it to Ft. Worth and Wright Field, etc.

Previously, they had lost Mogul balloons, with no special goal of recovering them (due to them having off the shelf parts). Mogul flights 3 and 4 were both lost in June. (this is from their own report of the incident) They got lost, because the radar kept losing them, sometimes even when they were in sight.

Yet, they crated up this "off-the-shelf" debris and sent it to the top labs for foreign craft analysis? We're supposed to believe they didn't recognize balsa wood, foil paper, and balloons? Seriously? Then of course, there's the bit with Moore's explanation of flight 4. For starters, with the lack of documentation, it's more supported that there was no flight 4!
roswellproof.homestead.com...

THIS is the best evidence. The military's own actions contradict their statements. If their claim is to be believed, why didn't they quickly seize previously (and subsequently) lost Mogul balloon trains? Why was this one so special? According to their report...it wasn't special, had the same setup as # 2 if it even existed.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
reply to post by Monts
 


Very good point,. Always makes me laugh that the military could employ so many mentally unbalanced people to guard and operate the nuclear defence programs, the airspace defence and detection programs and so forth. Very curious that the minute someone retires from the military they are no longer trustworthy and are somehow 'damaged goods' when it comes to the credibility of their testimonies. Curious.

No pics, no evidence! No camera footage - national security of course! Testimony counts for nothing! Give him the death penalty on the basis of the witness testimony!

Smoke and Mirrors.


Your comments, above, answer the questions you asked in your comments below:
Arrogance doesn't really do justice as a descriptor of your attitude. How the hell do you know the age of the 'ignorant believers'???

"There's a couple of things a person like you could be doing on a forum like this - but maybe you are simply an arrogant and unpleasant person in life, professing wisdom when displaying foolishness...

EDIT TO ADD - Interestingly, Arbitraeger hasn't replied to either of the comments I posted in response to his. Funny that when he's been called out for changing his tack (for approaching the debunk from two different perspectives which contradict each other), he seems to shy away from responding.

Also interesting to note the posts which punctuate actual debate in this thread - "speculation" ignorant believers" etc, which add nothing to the discussion. Sounds like unintelligent Plant Life to me."



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
I deleted my post because I saw later on that the video was already posted.
edit on 27/12/10 by spacevisitor because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Note to all, lets please focus on attacking the points posters make, and not other posters. Thanks.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Shrike


Perhaps Arbitrageur is ignoring you because you misspell his name!


Or because you think that your replies necessitate his involvement with what seems to be uninteresting replies by you. Are you an "ignorant believer"? Have I struck a nerve?

I am arrogant. I've earned that "title" especially when dealing with the mentally-challenged (hint).


Your attitude is beyond despicable. To willingly engage in a debate with someone while simultaneously insinuating that they are mentally challenged is, amongst many other things, childish, immature, and counterproductive.

Your ideas and theories would carry much more weight with people like myself if you learned to express them without demeaning others. I get the distinct impression that you are not interested in finding out the truth, but are more interested in being right and looking superior.

I don't think any of us here bear the privilege to claim they know what happened at Roswell. None of us were there. Many of us can accept that fact, I'd suggest you try to do the same.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ozkyaj

Originally posted by The Shrike


Perhaps Arbitrageur is ignoring you because you misspell his name!


Or because you think that your replies necessitate his involvement with what seems to be uninteresting replies by you. Are you an "ignorant believer"? Have I struck a nerve?

I am arrogant. I've earned that "title" especially when dealing with the mentally-challenged (hint).


Your attitude is beyond despicable. To willingly engage in a debate with someone while simultaneously insinuating that they are mentally challenged is, amongst many other things, childish, immature, and counterproductive.

Your ideas and theories would carry much more weight with people like myself if you learned to express them without demeaning others. I get the distinct impression that you are not interested in finding out the truth, but are more interested in being right and looking superior.

I don't think any of us here bear the privilege to claim they know what happened at Roswell. None of us were there. Many of us can accept that fact, I'd suggest you try to do the same.


The truth came out in 1947 but people such as yourself does not accept the truth, you seem to be happy with the conspiraces that have arisen thanks to the popular authors, initiated by Mr get-out-of-my-way-I'm-on-my-way-to-the-bank Friedman. Anyone that posits questionable material has to be notified of such. Do YOU really believe that a UFO crashed near Roswell and that alien bodies were removed? Do you really believe that UFOs crash willy-nilly all over the planet? If you do, you have a lot of introspecting to do. Find the irrefutable evidence to support Roswell and I mean something solid not all of the stuff that's been shot down by critical researchers, such as Karl Pflock. Read his book and see why Roswell was not a UFO crash. There are other authors so don't nitpick him without doing the research.

A few other members, some well-known to the world, that exhibit critical thinking also get on the believers' case. When the less-educated insult a highly-educate authority such as James Oberg, do you get on their case? When Arbitrageur, or Phage, or any of the critical thinkers tell a believer he is not using all of his marbles and coming to errroneous conclusions, do you get on their cases? Aren't you being selective here?

I don't see you getting on their case. Why do you single me out?

edit on 27-12-2010 by The Shrike because: Additional comments.

edit on 27-12-2010 by The Shrike because: Additional comments.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   
I keep recommending one source above others although any serious researcher can come up with similar information except that you can't interview any longer those who have passed on. But we're fortunate to have their present testimony to compare against the past. The present testimony is proof that what believers want to accept has no basis in fact.

Here are some research comments by Karl Pflock as found in his book "ROSWELL: Inconvenient Facts and the Will to Believe" (2001), page 209, and this is not best nor it illustrates the major participants' changed testimony:
"Somewhat more rooted in reality are the attempts of the Roswell Photo Interpretation Team (RPIT) and others to ferret out the meaning of words on a piece of paper Brig. Gen. Roger Ramey is seen holding in two of the photographs taken of him on July 8, 1947, as he poses beside the NYU-Mogul debris brought to Fort Worth by Maj. Jesse Marcel. J. Bond Johnson, the man who took the photographs in Ramey's office, founded and .s RPIT, which is dedicated to analyzing the images he and Fort Worth Army Air Field public information officer Maj. Charles Cashon captured in Ramey's office.

When first contacted by Roswell researchers in 1989, Johnson had very hazy memories of the events forty-two years before, but seemed to accept the weather balloon and radar target explanation. It was not long before he found the opinions of crashed-saucer proponents persuasive, and he seems sincerely to believe he was duped by the army in 1947. He now devotes much of his time to proving this through interpretation of what is shown in his and Cashon's photos. Among other things, Johnson and RPIT claim they have "'proved conclusively'" that the debris photographed in Ramey's office could not possibly have been part of a New York University balloon project flight train, this despite all the evidence to the contrary."

I use Pflock's book exclusively but similar reliable material can be found with little effort. The testimony found in Pflock's book can be relied upon or questioned by those who think they know better. I suggest that before Pflock's research is criticized, that those doing the criticiizing offer reliable material and not just assumptions.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Shrike[The truth came out in 1947 but people such as yourself does not accept the truth, you seem to be happy with the conspiraces that have arisen thanks to the popular authors, initiated by Mr get-out-of-my-way-I'm-on-my-way-to-the-bank Friedman. Anyone that posits questionable material has to be notified of such. Do YOU really believe that a UFO crashed near Roswell and that alien bodies were removed? Do you really believe that UFOs crash willy-nilly all over the planet? If you do, you have a lot of introspecting to do. Find the irrefutable evidence to support Roswell and I mean something solid not all of the stuff that's been shot down by critical researchers, such as Karl Pflock. Read his book and see why Roswell was not a UFO crash. There are other authors so don't nitpick him without doing the research.


You mean like Kal Korff?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


You still haven't answered my question The Shrike.

Why are you here? You say you already know the answer to this issue. So why do waste your time on these threads?

Do you believe you are really helping people by insulting them?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
I would suggest people read this thread i authored some time ago...

Operation XCharlie a strange coincidence?

Then, whatever happens at Roswell takes on a somewhat different light. I just don't buy the unbelievable coincidence that the USA is presented with a UFO report from Britain that is written off, almost 100% erroneously from the evidence as well, as *a weather balloon* and lo and behold, that's what Roswell turns into days after the Americans read the British report.




top topics



 
106
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join