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.

 

On 65th anniversary of Roswell ‘UFO’ crash, questions remain.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Interesting Fox News report on Roswell almost 65 years to the day:


On July 8, 1947, a crash in Roswell, N.M., was the spark that started UFO fever burning in the U.S. And for some, that passion is just as intense today as when they first learned that a crash in the desert had been labeled a UFO -- and quickly re-labeled a weather balloon by government officials.


Full source here:

www.foxnews.com...

So, what's peoples thoughts on this? Simple weather balloon or something else entirely, the mystery around this event is still as evident today as it was not long after it happened.

Personally, I don't know if we will ever know the truth in our lifetime but the fact that the airforce has changed their excuses for this so many times, I think their actions speak volumes, something is being hidden

edit on 9-7-2012 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Since then there have been numerous sightings of UFO's all over the world.

However, in America, has there been any true contact?...
Nothing concrete. It's disappointing we haven't had first contact.
The people of this world are shielded by their shadow governments.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
News from today

c.i.a agent



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
The Air Force found "something" out there, and the infamous picture of the "weather balloon" wreckage, in which General Ramey is posing with, has revealed something more, because he is holding a telegram which is partially visible, and with our high-resolution technology, most of it has been decoded.

roswellproof.homestead.com...

Supposed text of what is visible:

URGENT
HQAAF
WASHINGTON
8 JULY 1947
VANDENBERG 17:13 CST
FROM: HQ 8TH AAF
SUB: ROSWELL
0) FWAAF ACKNOWLEDGES THAT A "DISK" IS NEXT NEW FIND WEST OF
1) THE CORDON . AT LOCATION WAS A WRECK NEAR OPERATION AT THE
.............IN ADDITION.........."POD".............AIRFOIL.............
2) "RANCH" AND THE VICTIMS OF THE WRECK YOU FORWARDED TO THE
3) ???TEAM AT FORT WORTH, TEX.
4) AVIATORS IN THE "DISC" THEY WILL SHIP FOR A1-8TH ARMY AFU,
VISITORS.................................................................................AAF
5) BY B-29 -ST OR C47. WRIGHT AF ASSESS AIRFOIL AT ROSWELL. ASSURE
.....................................................ASSIST FLY-OUT...........................ABOUT
6) THAT CIC/TEAM SAID THIS MISSTATE MEANING OF STORY AND THINK
NOON........................SEND.........................................................SAID
7) LATE TODAY SEND NEXT OUT PR OF WEATHER BALLOONS WOULD TAKE
...........................................................................................................FARE
...........................................................................................................WORK
8) IF PHOTOS USED AND LAND DEMORWIN CREWS.
BETTER IF THEY ADD .....................................9) RAMEY

COPY TOP SECRET

Please see the link for the photo of the telegram.

Please be aware that this is from one researcher who has tried to decode it for years. There are differing interpretations of this document. Nevertheless, something is weird about the Roswell incident, and the fact that the Army AAF first reports it as a crashed disc, and then changes their story, tells me that something odd happened on that day.

I don't believe the story about it being Project Mogul, complete with crash test dummies. I would imagine that the initial investigators on the scene could tell the difference.

We may never know.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Zcustosmorum
 


Good for Fox News not being completely bias.


"It was not a damn weather balloon -- it was what it was billed when people first reported it," Chase Brandon, a 35-year CIA veteran, told the Huffington Post. His comments came on July 8, 2012 -- 65 years after the Roswell Daily Record newspaper ran a front page article claiming “RAAF Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch in Roswell Region.” Read more: www.foxnews.com...


Anyone who has done some serious research into Roswell knows that there are too many inconsistencies for it to have been "Project Mogul" and some balloons.

I always find it funny how the flow of misinformation and propaganda works.

In a single article you basically have the "Authority" (government) claiming it's a balloon and the case is closed. Then we have an individual (cia agent) from within that Authority saying the complete opposite.
Cracks me up.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
To think that when this was reported by an official source at a USAF base this source used the term ,flying saucer", that in its self contains a very high level of ,(what Hynek would later term in his estimations of those UFO reports that contained very unusual data), STRANGENESS and has to be in the equation of what makes up the final explanations given so far. What has to be asked here is was there any criteria for official military back up plans for such a incident that happened at Roswell,or to put it mildly ,was there any levels of cover up briefings for ALL military personnel including base commanders given by the military or governmental intelligences in regards to any possible "off world"," flying saucer" or "UFO"sightings OR crashes, there seems to have been NONE.

If there was such briefings on UFOs that had the agenda of "cover up"then WHY did this military source come out with a statement that used the term "flying saucer" in his FIRST report.WHY would this military source risk breaking any national security laws if such were in place.This is the big smoking gun for me ,that this was FIRST and primary reported as a "flying saucer" indicated that there where NO such briefings or protocols in place for any military sources going public about UFOs , that is why it was reported as it was ,first hand and why this source thought nothing of or even fearing punishment in using the term flying saucer , this military source who first went public using the term "flying saucer was telling the truth borne out of innocence and fearing no reprimands from his superiors because no one every expected a UFO to crash or even exist ,that is why there was no CONTINUANCY. plans in place for such an incident


.What also has to be taken into account is that IF this was a secret test or something military gone wrong then WHY was this military source NOT briefed or aware of it in case something did go wrong as we are led to believe, why risk further suspicions and world media involvement in a supposed secret test by stating a term that would arouse more suspicions??? Then we have the three to date USAF explanations, three times they changed their story ,why, because the first report was the true one and they did not ever foresee or expect such an incident to occur they had no CONTINUANCY plans in place for such a out of this world scenario that unfold at Roswell , that is why the first report contained the term flying saucer.
edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)

edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)

edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)

edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
"Roswell" has now become synonymous with the UFO/Alien story. Whatever that story is.

It is impossible to tell from reading official reports from the military or witness statements from first hand witnesses and their families or close friends. Never mind the musings of the professional UFO writers like Randle, Friedman or Redfern, The information is conflicting and contradictory.

The original report 65 years ago suggest something extraordinary was found in the desert. Whilst the retraction and then mundane tale of a downed weather balloon causing all the fuss smells of somekind of cover up. However this was the 1940s when communications were a lot simpler than today. Very little was heard of the story until the late 70s. It seems then everyone began to tell tales as the years passed. The alien "gray" replacing the humanoid types from 2 decades earlier. Abduction stories hit critical mass and the new decade brought flying triangles (as opposed to saucers). Then we had leaks about MJ-12, Bob Lazar in Area 51 and in between times the Dulce and Bennewitz story. Is it all mythology and folklore? If the truth is out there then so are the lies. Lies that often come from "official" sources.

It is likely that something strange happened back in the desert in 1947. As to what the military or government know they don't seem to want us to know. Maybe it would destabilise the world in some way?Maybe they are too scared to let us know the truth? Perhaps they are ordered not to by ET? Or maybe they haven't really any idea what's going on at all but don't want to admit it.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
In a 1980’s-ish conversation with retired DIA head Eugene Tighe, which was NOT about UFOs, but about sleuthing Soviet space secrets, we were discussing techniques of using scattered clues to infer broad generalizations about foreign technology. I was suddenly startled to hear the Roswell story come up. In the early 1950s, Tighe [1921-1994] had been a student at the DIA Intelligence School (over in the Anacostia Annex to the Navy Yard in DC for many years -- I worked there in 1973-1974). He told me that the 'crashed disk' was a 'case study' for future intelligence officers in how NOT to handle an anomalous recovery or event -- jump to a sexy conclusion right away before full analysis. Tighe told me that the officer's freaking out over what he was sure he had a hold of, and arguing for his interpretation even when he was asked to just provide what he had observed, was held up by one of his teachers as a counter-example of what a good intelligence officer is NOT supposed to do.

Elaboration: An intelligence officer is tasked to collect ‘intelligence’, that is, data about activities of interest. The collection ideally is ‘raw’ and unbiased by any interpretation of what it means – that is the task of intelligence analysts higher up the chain. A constant hazard of this process is an intelligence officer’s unwitting use of his own unauthorized [and untrained] analysis and his conclusions as to an explanation for the intelligence he is gathering. This is a process that can and does lead to subconscious editing of raw data to downplay information contrary to the way the intelligence officer has come to believe it must have happened [also called ‘confirmation bias’]. It’s why Marcel’s behavior would have been such a useful ‘bad example’ for future intelligence officers.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
The latest issue of Tim Printy's skeptical newsletter SUNlite (4-4) is now on-line. It is mostly about Roswell.

home.comcast.net...



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
I think it is fair to say that Roswell is the ultimate UFO case and one which has never been debunked. Roswell is the case that every UFO follower should look into because there are so many twists and turns in the incident that it leaves you feeling baffled at times. Personally, I do believe that aliens did visit our plant back in 1947. There are just far too many witnesses that describe seeing the same thing. Witnesses include military and government employees, CIA and FBI agents and most importantly the families. It's interesting to note that many were visited by military officials and even today families are still sworn to secrecy and have been threatened. One day the story will unravel; hopefully in my lifetime.
edit on 9-7-2012 by ProfessorT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Interesting points mate, can I ask your opinion, what do you make of the constant revision of airforce excuses given? Incompetence or serious attempts to close the topic once and for all?



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   
The "mystery" of Roswell was quickly solved in July 1947. An insignificant event was blown out of proportion in a brief media frenzy, and then quickly identified as the non-issue that it really was. It should have been all but forgotten, a mere sidebar to the history of UFOlogy. instead, it was revived in the 1970s and became the "tent pole" of most overarching UFO theories. Time and energy wasted on Roswell could have been used by researchers for the examination of more interesting UFO stories.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I find it sort of ironic the skeptic in that newsletter says:


without something more convincing than memories..


.. and then regales us with their skeptical opinion based primarily on.. yes, people's memory of the event. There are a slew of reports of a much larger debris field, from Major Marcel, Tommy Tyree, Bill Brazel Jr., a neighboring rancher, probably a bit more than 20 more people who attested it was a lot more / spread much further / contained more debris than a tinfoil weather balloon as reported. Sheep detoured a mile around the debris field. Rancher's son said it was 1/4" mile long, and a gouge at the northern end. Bessie (ranchers daughter) said it was a football field sized area.

But debunke.. er.. skeptics will be skeptics.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   
My question is this: Jesse Marcel Jr. said the debris his father brought by for his family to look at was made of small I-beams and foil-like material. Now, during the time, weather balloons being sent up were made of foil and beams. It would have to be an incredible coincidence that a "UFO" from another world crashed and was found to be partially constructed the same way as weather balloons of earth. What are the chances of that?



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Beggars belief that a military base commander could not identify debris from a crashed weather balloon, all the official explanations,yes the three of them to date do not add up , sadly most of the witness are dead but their testimony is still valid to this day.Was there a official stance or briefing ever in usage .in how to deal with a possible UFO or ET crash/landing?I believe there was not any such protocol and what we got in the FIRST official report that went public was the truth from a source who told it like it was before he was shot down in flames and made to look like an ass like so many people who are just simply telling the truth.They had THREE attempts at explaining what crashed and they LIED three times,now is it wise to trust a KNOWN liar,would anyone put trust in someone who knowingly lied to them in ever day life.

edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)

edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)

edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   
In the summer of 1947 the only place in the world where atomic bombs existed was New Mexico. If such a thing as UFOs were intelligently operated, New Mexico likely would have been a place of interest.
Accidents happen, weather balloons crash. But if the incident at Roswell involved only a weather balloon -- and not a UFO as the Air Force insisted and continues to insist -- why is that incident still classified as Top Secret 65 years after the fact?
It seems clear that whatever the government insists upon saying about Roswell is simply not true. A flying object not of this Earth crashed in Roswell, and that's a fact you can do without, taxpayers.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   
I absolutely believe Jesse Marcel Jr. and Sr. and don't think they're lying. They found strange material (completely separate from the actual claimed "crash" site) that they have never seen before. Strange material that happened to be constructed exactly as weather balloons of the time. The connection to earthly origins is obvious. It especially should be obvious to Jesse Jr, who one would think is a halfway intelligent man, being a practicing doctor.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Just to make a point, for all we know, a UFO could've crashed into a weather ballloon, hence the debris claims. There are a few scenarios but as I said, we may never know, I do think however, that whatever it was caused some amount of panic with the forces at the time.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join