Actual Roswell Newspaper Text - The "Smoking Gun" - NO UFO!

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by The Shrike
FBI Teletype message, July 8, 1947, concerning the Roswell "Disc"

So you don't think the FBI knew that the Freedom of Information Act would be passed about 19 years later in 1966 and planted that memo as disinformation to hide the recovery of an alien craft?

Neither do I.

It also seems to highlight that while it appeared to be some kind of balloon-like material, they were having trouble identifying it, contrary to the claims that nobody would have any problems identifying the type of balloon. It's clear that it wasn't an ordinary weather balloon, whatever type of balloon it was, so Brazel and Marcel were both right about that much.

Without referring to anything in particular, it seems that weather balloons were a simple affair. But because of the spying factor, they needed to come up with additional factors that made the Mogul (or whatever) balloon train a much longer affair plus development of hardier materials or old materials requiring different treatments which threw the "experienced" into a "frenzy" of misidentification. Weather balloons probably just ascended and descended and now here is something that may have been designed to ascend and hover much longer so it could detect the nuclear blasts which TPTB didn't have the schedule to. I don't know how the device would register the nuclear blasts or if it had a radio system. That's beyond my ken. But regardless of the complexity of the project and the equipment used, it's an acceptable explanation that makes more sense than a UFO crashing, etc. People don't want to accept prosaic explanations and would rather a fantastical explanation.

The above is my last reply to this thread as nothing further is going to be gained. Thank you, it's been fun.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by spacevisitor
An Engineer Looks at the Project Mogul Hypothesis by Robert A. Galganski

The debris field
(2) pieces which could not be deformed or damaged by any means, even when whacked with a 16-pound sledgehammer. I refer to both kinds of debris

If it can't be damaged, then why is it in pieces?

That claim debunks itself, right?

In other words, it's in pieces because it was damaged.
And if it couldn't be damaged then it wouldn't be in pieces.

Do people even think about these claims? I don't see how any sense can be made of that claim other than to dismiss it.
Am I missing something?

Yes, there are people who think about these claims as you can see in the reply of debrisfield to your post, and yes it could be that you have missed something.

Here are two possibilities.

Don’t you think that the power of an internal explosion on board the Alien craft could have torn some parts to pieces?

Or if the Alien craft was shot down by another Alien craft, the power of the weaponry used to bring it down could have been responsible for tear some parts to pieces.

But may I ask what you think about the claim is that no strings or wires were to be found, because is it not so then that all the parts of a mogul balloon were hold together with strings or wires.

No strings or wires were to be found but there were some eyelets in the paper to indicate that some sort of attachment may have been used.

www.cufon.org...

That claim debunks the mogul balloon in my opinion.

But may I ask what you think about the claim is that no strings or wires were to be found, because is it not so then that all the parts of a mogul balloon were hold together with strings or wires.

No strings or wires were to be found but there were some eyelets in the paper to indicate that some sort of attachment may have been used.

www.cufon.org...

That claim debunks the mogul balloon in my opinion.

Exactly. The absence of balloon rigging automatically debunks Mogul. The absence of any expected Mogul equipment debunks Mogul. The single weather balloon and radar target in Fort Worth (Ramey's story and the photos) debunks Mogul. The absence of Mack Brazel's "tape with flowers" in the photos debunks Mogul. The presence of an intact balloon in the photos instead of Brazel's small "rubber strips" debunks Mogul. Marcel's "square mile" debris field from 1947 debunks Mogul. Cavitt's 1994 "20 foot square" debris field debunks Mogul.

Perhaps most importantly, the absence of any documented Mogul balloon flight in the actual official records debunks Mogul.

Roswell debunkers don't like to think about any of these matters. Instead they try to sweep these very serious inconsistencies under the carpet, or make ridiculous, self-contractory proclamations that the single balloon/target in the Ramey photos is "consistent" with a Mogul balloon crash.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
Here is a few questions that comes from a good little read of a website that The Flash pointed out to us.

- After personally examining samples of the material, why did Brazel’s neighbors encourage him to report the crash for the $3,000 reward reported by the press for physical evidence of a flying disc and not for the standard $5 balloon reward?”

Those questions really aren't that hard to answer if you do a little research and logical thinking.

Since 1994, pretty much everyone agrees there was more material than a standard weather balloon, so it wasn't a standard weather balloon, though that was the cover story the USAF gave from 1947-1993 and it's why we all knew there was a conspiracy to cover up what was really found, until 1994.

So you've got something that crashed and it's not a weather balloon, so why would you seek a weather balloon reward for $5 when you might be able to get a $3000 reward for what was obviously some kind of larger flying object that fell from the sky? Um, because $3000 is more than $5 and you know it's not a weather balloon?

I'm sorry but that really has to be one of the dumbest questions I've ever seen in my life.

This question has a purpose although it may seem dumb to you Its a question to point out an obvious point in this situation. A point that should be obvious to the general public but its not. A point that should be obvious to the government but they don't admit it.

So yes I can see how you would think this question and other questions proposed by this website might seem dumb because the answers seem so obvious. But remember we aren't the general public and we aren't the government trying to cover up something.

In conclusion these questions are useful tools for people that are new to this case and although the questions seem "dumb" to you they certainly can be useful for someone trying to familiarize their self with the Roswell incident.

-Alien

reply to post by The Shrike


Thanks for the link!

Wilmot said that it appeared to him to be about 1,500 feet high and going fast. He estimated between 400 and 500 miles per hour.

Wilmot, who is one of the most respected and reliable citizens in town, kept the story to himself hoping that someone else would come out and tell about having seen one, but finally today decided that he would go ahead and tell about it. The announcement that the RAAF was in possession of one came only a few minutes after he decided to release the details of what he had seen.

Originally posted by UFO Partisan

www.roswellufofestival.com...
Wilmot said that it appeared to him to be about 1,500 feet high and going fast. He estimated between 400 and 500 miles per hour.

Wilmot, who is one of the most respected and reliable citizens in town, kept the story to himself hoping that someone else would come out and tell about having seen one, but finally today decided that he would go ahead and tell about it. The announcement that the RAAF was in possession of one came only a few minutes after he decided to release the details of what he had seen.

The Wilmot Roswell flying saucer sighting of July 2, 1947, is interesting in a number of ways. The Wilmots reported the sighting to the Roswell Daily Record on July 8 just before the Record received the base press release that they had a flying disc in their possession. Thus the Wilmots could not have been influenced in any way by the announcement. Also as the story indicates, the Wilmots were not town flakes but highly respected and reliable. Another interesting part of the Wilmot story was how they indicated the object departing to the northwest, which would be in the direction of the Foster Ranch where the debris field was found.

There is a little more to the Wilmot story. In his last interview in 1981, former Roswell intelligence chief Jesse Marcel said he had met the Wilmot's son Paul when he returned to Roswell in 1980. According to Marcel, Paul Wilmot said his parents had also seen the object seeming to explode in the distance, but did not report this. Marcel then added that a few days later was when the rancher came to town to report that something had exploded over his ranch during a lightning storm.

Originally posted by The Shrike

Originally posted by TheFlash

Originally posted by The Shrike

Originally posted by TheFlash
If you really believe that it was just a 'weather balloon' that was recovered in Roswell in 1947 then you should review the information at the Web site below and answer the questions toward the bottom of the page for us. I would sure like answers to those questions.

Roswell Link

I don't particularly feel like answering every question that is created when every answer can be found with dilligent research. However, I will offer the following from the site that you included the link to and it speaks volumes:
"As you can well imagine, it has not been an easy task to reconstruct what actually occurred in July of 1947. Many of the men (and the few women) involved are now dead, and those living are quite elderly. Human memory does not record events with complete accuracy, especially after years have elapsed."

Conversely, to apply your reasoning/tactics - I don't feel like arguing with your attempted debunking when every point you try to make can be refuted by diligent research. I also find it very amusing how you chose to focus in on that one statement from the Web page.

It's very easy to stop my "debunking" (don't hold your breath): YOU provide evidence that a UFO crashed near Roswell. Why is such an easy request an impossible task? You'd think that with all of the pro-UFO crash supporters out there and in here, just one would be able to produce irrefutable evidence. I'll tell you why no one has been able to produce an iota of irrefutable evidence - it doesn't exist! Superb researchers such as Todd, Pflock, Korff ( yes, I know!), and others have produced more convicing results against a UFO crash but the power of the believers overwhelm common sense, logic, and reason. Critical thinking suffered a major blow in 1947!

Once again - by the same token why don't you show us how simple it is to fulfill an easy request and provide us with irrefutable evidence that it was a weather balloon that crashed there?

Originally posted by The Shrike
It's very easy to stop my "debunking" (don't hold your breath): YOU provide evidence that a UFO crashed near Roswell. Why is such an easy request an impossible task? You'd think that with all of the pro-UFO crash supporters out there and in here, just one would be able to produce irrefutable evidence. I'll tell you why no one has been able to produce an iota of irrefutable evidence - it doesn't exist! Superb researchers such as Todd, Pflock, Korff ( yes, I know!), and others have produced more convicing results against a UFO crash but the power of the believers overwhelm common sense, logic, and reason. Critical thinking suffered a major blow in 1947!

Originally posted by TheFlash
Once again - by the same token why don't you show us how simple it is to fulfill an easy request and provide us with irrefutable evidence that it was a weather balloon that crashed there?

It is at that point that all the skeptics fade away or try to change the subject. Yes, it would be far easier to prove a balloon crashed since there would be no classification involved. There would be no reason to destroy or hide the incriminating documents, like if there were a real UFO crash.

The modern-day "anti-UFO" people claim a lost Mogul balloon explains Roswell. (A claim that started with USAF counterintelligence trying to counter a Congressional probe into Roswell.) But the alleged Mogul balloon never existed, not according to the actual official Mogul documents. It was dreamed into existence to debunk Roswell.

So when you ask for the documentary evidence to prove the alleged Mogul crashed, all you hear is the sound of silence.

to the shrike i apolagise in advance if i have missed one of your replys already explaining what i am going to ask.

well here gos, alot of people have put hours,days even years researching the roswell crash and have taking alot of time and effort to get it here on ATS, so my question is instead of you just debunking from your own supposed knowledge where are your links and your evidence? i would love to see some.

in future dont try and debuk people that have come up with the goods after hours of research and you havent "erm i think i will debunk this thread today or at least cause some upset" to$$*&!

Originally posted by simples
to the shrike i apolagise in advance if i have missed one of your replys already explaining what i am going to ask.

well here gos, alot of people have put hours,days even years researching the roswell crash and have taking alot of time and effort to get it here on ATS, so my question is instead of you just debunking from your own supposed knowledge where are your links and your evidence? i would love to see some.

in future dont try and debuk people that have come up with the goods after hours of research and you havent

"erm i think i will debunk this thread today or at least cause some upset" to$$*&!

You're still wet behind the ears, kiddo. I've supplied links that'll set you straight. All the time and effort by others who favor a UFO crash, who haven't posted one iota of evidence for such and this is the best you can do?

Originally posted by The Shrike

Originally posted by simples
to the shrike i apolagise in advance if i have missed one of your replys already explaining what i am going to ask.

well here gos, alot of people have put hours,days even years researching the roswell crash and have taking alot of time and effort to get it here on ATS, so my question is instead of you just debunking from your own supposed knowledge where are your links and your evidence? i would love to see some.

in future dont try and debuk people that have come up with the goods after hours of research and you havent

"erm i think i will debunk this thread today or at least cause some upset" to$$*&!

You're still wet behind the ears, kiddo. I've supplied links that'll set you straight. All the time and effort by others who favor a UFO crash, who haven't posted one iota of evidence for such and this is the best you can do?

No The Shrike....you have posted links to what YOU believe will set someone straight, and into your line of thinking. Do you not believe that we all have the right to post our opinions/questions without the nasty digs you constantly make to those who disagree with you??? Take a wee step back sweetie and do the big breathing thang before you comment.
I could post links that I BELIEVE make the whole Roswell thing true to me, but they have been posted before so Im not gonna go there. The evidence that the Roswell event DID happen, outweighs the evidence that says it didnt. IMO.
I for one dont take everything a high ranking military person/s says as gospel, its obvious that you do. That along with a few newspaper articles. And thats cool!
BTW....this has nothing to do with your comments re a thread I posted a ways back that you scorned. Actually...you were right on there! I should not have done it, I blame a few to many vinos for that.
Lesson learnt. Please learn yours.

thank you annela, the shrike annela is right the only links you have posted are the ones you think debunk the mystery not hard solid evidence, no matter what link you post you can not deny that the military declared that they had recovered a flying disc then the next day completely changed there story to a weather baloon how would you confuse it im stumped all this said i dont beleive in this case we will ever get the truth because the goverment will look oh so stupid and unreliable and i also beleive no one on ATS can prove what actually happened or DEBUNK anything!!!

reply to post by simples

no matter what link you post you can not deny that the military declared that they had recovered a flying disc then the next day completely changed there story to a weather balloon

And no link will allow you to deny that the second story was a falsehood, as admitted by the military, when then changing the story yet again, and stating it was a Mogul balloon train. So, if we accept the THIRD official explanation, then the first TWO were both bogus, meaning they've already lied TWICE. Given this, how can we possibly put much faith in the THIRD answer?

I mean, if someone punched your child in the nose, and I told you that day, Billy did it. Then, the next day, I said, no, Sam did it. Then, later, I said, no, Robbie did it. How much faith do you have that Robbie did it?

^^^^^^^^^^^ i like it and totaly agree i have to say my faith lies with the first story that was told, but all i was trying to say was that i dont think we will ever know what story was 100% legit.

i deffo think it was the flying disc because i would love to know how you would confuse any! downed balloon with a disc shaped object?

reply to post by simples

 

no matter what link you post you can not deny that the military declared that they had recovered a flying disc then the next day completely changed there story to a weather balloon

Quibble: Story was officially changed to weather balloon the same day, within 3 hours. It just didn't make it into the newspapers until the next day because of the lateness of the change.

Originally posted by Gazrok
And no link will allow you to deny that the second story was a falsehood, as admitted by the military, when then changing the story yet again, and stating it was a Mogul balloon train. So, if we accept the THIRD official explanation, then the first TWO were both bogus, meaning they've already lied TWICE. Given this, how can we possibly put much faith in the THIRD answer?

I mean, if someone punched your child in the nose, and I told you that day, Billy did it. Then, the next day, I said, no, Sam did it. Then, later, I said, no, Robbie did it. How much faith do you have that Robbie did it?

To extend Gazrok's analogy a little further, since they invented a nonexistent Mogul flight to "explain" Roswell the third time around, it's a little like saying Robbie did it even though Robbie died last year.

And to extend it even further, the AF's crash dummies from the 1950s to explain reports of alien bodies in 1947 is like saying Joe did it, even though Joe wasn't born yet.

just a quick add to that ref the "SECRET" mogul balloon , why did it take 5 or so days to clean up? why all the secrecy surrounding it with armed guards? when the supposed "SECRET" mogul balloon was declassified two yes two days later.

bizare!!!!!!!!!!

The truth that we do know and admitted by the government is that they lied. They staged the photo-op and this was not the balloon they later said had crashed. They admitted this. You are dealing with liars. If you use common sense you can easily see that they are still lying. For every point in the Roswell story they make up a new and every changing lie. Why have a top secret project to detect sound waves from Soviet nuclear tests? The Soviet Union wanted us to know they were testing and wanted us to know they had these weapons. They probably sent us pictures. The lies are pitiful. Stop believing admitted liars.

I know alot of people got promoted somewhat easily during ww2, but I think a MAJOR 2 years after ww2 would know the difference between rubber strips, wood, tough paper and a saucer. They don't usually promote idiots to major, captain yes but major not likely. (though i did know one when I served in the 90's).

Originally posted by simples
the supposed "SECRET" mogul balloon was declassified two yes two days later.

Source?

Originally posted by illuminateme
I know alot of people got promoted somewhat easily during ww2, but I think a MAJOR 2 years after ww2 would know the difference between rubber strips, wood, tough paper and a saucer.

This comment implies Marcel described a saucer...he did not, just a bunch of very thin pieces of metal similar in thickness to the metal used on a radar reflector, and other debris that sounds similar to balloon debris to me. He never claimed to see any saucer that I recall, but if he did, please provide a reference supporting that claim.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


1 times source kindle provided by alien abduct, wil do more research back soon