My name is Tom Carey, and I have spent the past 22 years researching the Roswell incident. Ask me an

Originally posted by TomCarey
reply to post by Maverick7

 

Playing word games, are we? There at least one in every barrel. By "education" and "training" I was referring to my formal education and the training that went along with it, which included my stint in the military. And one can research historical accounnts, which you demean as being just "stories," for their veracity and context regarding the subject at hand. In case you missed it, in courts of law credible testimony is considered "evidence," which has sent many a criminal to their ultimate fate.

Word games? Not at all. You implied that because of your education and training you had made certain determinations about the ET hypothesis or Roswell being 99.9% non-terrestrials. I simply asked what education and training you had that made you expert in such matters.

As to your INSULT about 'one in every barrel', isn't that beneath you? Why not just answer the questions. If you actually had no training or education related to propulsion, aircraft spotting, alien identification, or similar subjects, why not just say 'I misspoke, I have no training, just some experience hearing stories'.

As to stories and historical accounts, they are still stories, with sometimes second hand accounts. When you really dig down into the stories you find variations and vague information.

Saying that Roswell would be proved in a court of law is really a type of straw man argument isn't it? A court of law would find the 'facts' fairly incredible and in the absence of 'bodies' they wouldn't be able to rule on anything. There was not a crime committed, for example.

I'd suggest that you re-examine your position and realize that though you have a lot invested in this topic you could also be successful if you looked for flaws or alternate explanations. I'm surprised that looking into it for 22 years you don't find more than a few discrepancies. For example, there's never been any evidence of a craft, or storage of a craft. People like to talk about Area 51 but there's been a fair amount of evidence that all we have there are experimental craft of US origin.

Thanks for your input.

The world needs more Tom Careys- steadfast, focused, persistent, analytic, and patient beyond comprehension. Tom seems like the classic archetype of the scholarly mind firmly grounded within a strong moral compass.

Tom, I would like to posit an instance in which you were able to know everything you every wanted about Roswell and beyond. In this example, you discover that the Roswell crashes, regardless of their affine origins, consist of a somewhat crude technology in comparison to other technologies/entities that, over the years, have become known (not necessarily acquired) by humanity in its current state.

In this instance, you become aware that humans, at this time, are simply not able to fully cogitate the expansive reality of technology and associated sentient intelligences that you now know exist. Let’s say our collective neo-cortex isn’t yet wired in the right way… like how a dog can’t think past the immediate moment or see color.

Would you still want the world to know? Why?

All My Best,

J

Tom has graciously agreed to join us on tonights ATS Live! Radio show - we'll be interviewing him in Hour 2

Click the image for more details

Originally posted by Maverick7

Originally posted by TomCarey
reply to post by Maverick7

 

Playing word games, are we? There at least one in every barrel. By "education" and "training" I was referring to my formal education and the training that went along with it, which included my stint in the military. And one can research historical accounnts, which you demean as being just "stories," for their veracity and context regarding the subject at hand. In case you missed it, in courts of law credible testimony is considered "evidence," which has sent many a criminal to their ultimate fate.

Word games? Not at all. You implied that because of your education and training you had made certain determinations about the ET hypothesis or Roswell being 99.9% non-terrestrials. I simply asked what education and training you had that made you expert in such matters.

As to your INSULT about 'one in every barrel', isn't that beneath you? Why not just answer the questions. If you actually had no training or education related to propulsion, aircraft spotting, alien identification, or similar subjects, why not just say 'I misspoke, I have no training, just some experience hearing stories'.

As to stories and historical accounts, they are still stories, with sometimes second hand accounts. When you really dig down into the stories you find variations and vague information.

Saying that Roswell would be proved in a court of law is really a type of straw man argument isn't it? A court of law would find the 'facts' fairly incredible and in the absence of 'bodies' they wouldn't be able to rule on anything. There was not a crime committed, for example.

I'd suggest that you re-examine your position and realize that though you have a lot invested in this topic you could also be successful if you looked for flaws or alternate explanations. I'm surprised that looking into it for 22 years you don't find more than a few discrepancies. For example, there's never been any evidence of a craft, or storage of a craft. People like to talk about Area 51 but there's been a fair amount of evidence that all we have there are experimental craft of US origin.

Thanks for your input.

With all due respect, Tom has cited a lot of information on Roswell and there is one thing that separates you and the content of that information when it relates to witness testimonies and that is they were there you were not.

We should be concentrating on the two explanations that are the primary "Occams razors" here , why ,well the glaring fact is that when you lie you do so to cover something up or you have an agenda of concealment , now lets put that reality to the "Occams razors" perspective , we have the USAF intelligence's changing their explanation's not once, now twice but three times, why, because they were concealing the real or true origin of what happened.

Now it does not take a rocket scientist to work out and perceive that there is only two real possible origins here, secret military black ops; or ET technology, lets now try and work out why we should trust known liars, in ordinary life we all we not TRUST those who lie never mind three times.

The ET origin as one of those possible origins and is be the very nature of the reality that the USAF changed their stories three times is to me one gigantic and transparent red flag... these very valid points are very much pushed aside , the lairs perspective is a as transparent as the content of all those witnesses testimonies,,, time that reality was addressed in ALL debates or pontificates of the origins of what happened at Roswell.. deny ignorance is very much the attitude here... Carry on Tom , you have my attention ... and support..in the real possibility of an ET origin being a credible and plausible origin ...

Originally posted by K-PAX-PROT
Now it does not take a rocket scientist to work out and perceive that there is only two real possible origins here, secret military black ops; or ET technology, lets now try and work out why we should trust known liars, in ordinary life we all we not TRUST those who lie never mind three times.

I would say that there is another explanation.

Let's see what we can take for absolute truth.

Something strew debris over a 1/4 mile section of the Foster Ranch where Mac Brazel worked.

Brazel related that on June 14, 1947 he and 8-year-old son, Vernon came upon a large area of bright wreckage made up on rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks. (other accounts say it was Brazel's daugher Bessie who was with him).

Could the debris have been planted?

From this pile of debris, which Mac related to this to Sheriff Wilcox, who in turn related it to Maj. Jesse A. Marcel, we have a story about something crashing. Marcel and a man in plain clothes (possibly Sheridan Cavitt) were reported to have gone out to the ranch by jeep and picked up the remainder of the debris, all of which may have weighed about 5-10lbs.

How this got turned into a story of having "captured" a Flying Saucer, isn't easy to say. It smacks of a planned disinformation campaign. Whether that was to deflect from a 'real crash' elsewhere, or if it was a ploy to convince the Soviets during the cold war that we might have advanced technology, giving us an edge or perhaps diverting their intelligence to a dead end area, it's not known.

We then have various stories about bodies about Pappy Henderson being involved in flying something to Wright-Patterson, but beyond that no actual evidence.

Why people feel the need to jump to a 'non-terrestrial' explanation for a pile of loose debris is not clear. We all are intrigued by stores of this type.

Mr Carey , do you think the U.S. government will ever reopen an investigation into the Roswell Incident with the mass of information you and your colleagues have collected since their last effort to be taken into account ?

Originally posted by ilian51378


... Tom makes a good point about all the witnesses (600+) who gave their testimonies that support/suggest/prove an ET event, versus the zero (0) witnesses who came forth with a testimony/story about another plausible event. Only the government provided an alternative story, but let's see how credible they made themselves look in the eyes of the people:

1.) First statement of a military official "we have captured a flying saucer!"

2.) Two days later came another official statement, refuting the original one "Oh no, our military official who provided the first statement was a moron (hopefully not all military staff elected on high positions like the one of chief of the most elite military division in the U.S. at the time are such morons) and couldn't tell the difference between a milk and antifreeze - it was actually a high altitude balloon and not a saucer!"

3.) Some years later, the government had yet another change of heart and stated that "no, it wasn't a high altitude balloon (don't mind the fake pictures of the supposed balloon we showed you before) - it was dummies we dropped from the sky for our Project Mogul! Please pretend you are stupid if you happen to know that this project was not undertaken until 1952 and the Roswell incident happened in 1947..." Oh yeah, how about the fact that the government only interviewed five (5) witnesses on the supposed Project Mogul and the fact that three (3) of them (just so happens, or does it?) to have been involved with that project?

No documentation for Mogul: For all its stated reliance on documented facts, critics pointed out, the report concluded Mogul was the likely explanation even though no documents linking Mogul to the incident were discovered, and no Mogul equipment was produced to match the contemporary descriptions. Mark Rodeghier and Mark Chesney said: “It is clear… that the Air Force couldn't find any physical evidence that proves or documentation that clearly states that a balloon from Project Mogul was recovered… Second, the Air Force has no Mogul balloon material from 1947 to show to witnesses to provide a positive identification.”



5.) No military personnel seemingly punished for “misidentification”: If the “misidentification”, as critics put it, was merely an “over-reaction by Colonel Blanchard and Major Marcel”[3] (p. 30) as the Report describes, then why did the careers of some of these personnel not suffer as a result of this blunder? Rodegheir and Chesney: “Over-reaction indeed! Now there's an understatement… This explanation is made even more ludicrous by the successful careers that Marcel, and especially Blanchard, had in the Air Force after this monumental blunder, which should have resulted in instant demotion for them if their actions were what the Air Force is now claiming.”


.

Overall an excellent summary of all that's wrong with the official government explanation that has continued to evolve over the years. I have a quibble with point 2. The story began to be changed to "weather balloon" starting only about one hour rather than two days after the initial "flying disc" press release went public. Within 3 hours, Gen.Roger Ramey had already displayed shill weather balloon debris, had it photographed and had spoken to civilian reporters giving his opinion he thought it a weather balloon, brought in a weather officer to officially ID it, then put out a new press release officially changing the story to weather balloon. This can all be documented in surviving newspaper articles of the day.

The modern AF "explanation" was invented by Pentagon counterintelligence agents, one of them, Col. Richard Weaver, being the chief counterintelligence officer in charge of security for all Special Access Programs or R&D "black projects." As he described his job in an interview with a surviving Roswell counterintelligence officer (Sheridan Cavitt), their job was to keep the secrets. This was a classic example of the fox guarding the chicken coop. Can we really expect such a CI team to publish the truth if they had found it?

The Mogul balloon explanation is preposterous, contradicted by Mogul's own documentation and all official histories. Indeed, no documentation at all to support the existence of such a balloon flight, which was instead cancelled. Thus the official explanation is a nonexistence balloon flight explains Roswell.

And indeed the officers responsible for the supposed blunder, such as Marcel and Blanchard, suffered no career repercussions. Marcel's ratings by superior officers in-the-know went up, not down. E.g., Gen. "weather balloon" Ramey described Marcel as "outstanding" and command officer material as he was being transferred to higher intel work, and added that he had no one in his command to replace him. Marcel also received a promotion and was recommissioned afterward. Not at all what one would expect for someone who had badly bungled.

I have done some simple amateur research on Roswell, when I was a kid/young man when I had time to do so. A couple of things really struck me as odd about this story.. The First, how it was so quick to be shared to the media, if something like this happened in 2013, would the press handle this the same way?

Another thing that strikes me as odd, is if a UFO crashed back in 1947, why has it not happened again? Of all the times UFO E.T's are filmed or written about spoken about etc, why just this incident? I know there are so called other crash sites as well, where a UFO got shot down crashed etc. Yet my point is There is no smoking gun proof. That is a big, I mean very big hole in the credibility of the whole story.. I mean the element of chance is like 5 percent, or so in mathematics, I am just saying if a UFO saucer crashed once, it by chance is suppose to happen again..

Then of course in all fairness if this is true, we are trying to make something alien to our design logical, good luck in trying to figure it all out, I am saying that through experiences of my own..

I am thinking since there was so much black project events happening out in the Mojave, there is a good possibility something reverse engineered from one of the plunders of the world 2 went all wrong and crashed into the desert. When I was younger, I thought differently, There is no doubt in my mind thou at all, that there are E.T's things not from our world all around us, visiting sharing our time and space whatever, they are there, our ancestors wrote on cave walls about it, wrote about in in religious books and told stories of it..

I think in closing there is a instinctive reason behind Man, not being able to figure it out.. Roswell, also happened during the cold war, for all we know Roswell could have been part of a propaganda project, to put fear or intimidate the Russians etc, back then USA, was the technological power house, it was another 2 years before Russia tested there first atomic bomb..

Nothing like trying to intimidate your enemy by proclaiming you have alien technology .

I am just looking at the story at all angles, I am a very intelligent man, smart enough to feel bad for admitting it..

I look forward to listening to the show tonight, or hearing the rerun, I would be pleased to hear or learn something from Mr. Carey, that I have never heard before and can be pretty much proven, that indicates without a shadow of a doubt aliens crashed in a cow field..

Thank you..

Originally posted by TomCarey
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

After 22 years and over 600 first and second-hand witnesses who have pointed us to an extraterrestrial answer for the event, and none, zero, nada, who have pointed us elsewhere, Sir William of Occam has nowhere else to go.

Thank you Mr. Carey for joining us here at ATS!!

Just two questions if you have time:

1.) I know it may seem trivial, but 99.9% is not 100%, so what is it? That makes you from taking that final leap of saying thay you have absolutely know doubt and you know for 100% that this incident (crash of ET Flying Saucers and recovery of ET bodies) happened?

2.) I commend you on your dedication of nearly a quarter century of your life investigating this incident. Do have any knowledge that would indicate that a 'rescue' mission for the ET crash victims was ever made by fellow ET's?

Edit: Sorry if the 1st question has been answered. I am scrolling through and see where it was asked by a prior poster, however, have yet to see your response. Thank you
Thank you very much!!

Originally posted by Bicent76

Another thing that strikes me as odd, is if a UFO crashed back in 1947, why has it not happened again? Of all the times UFO E.T's are filmed or written about spoken about etc, why just this incident?

There have been other credible, fairly well-documented crash-retrieval cases, primarily Dec. 10, 1965, Kecksburg, PA and Oct. 4, 1967, Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia. With Shag Harbour, there is a paper trail of government documents where the crash object was repeatedly referred to as a "UFO," since all attempts at identification, such as plane crash, had failed. There is also a well-documented search for the remains of the object.

I am thinking since there was so much black project events happening out in the Mojave, there is a good possibility something reverse engineered from one of the plunders of the world 2 went all wrong and crashed into the desert.

First, New Mexico, not the Mojave desert. Second, some still-secret government project theory has been trotted out many times and always failed, since nobody has been able to find any credible evidence for any such project. 1947 technology would no longer be classified (except for something like A-bombs), nor would something like an experiment gone badly awry.

Nick Redfern tried this with his "Body Snatchers in the Desert" Roswell book where supposedly captured Japanese kamikaze pilots/mutant, deformed children from Ft. Stanton, N.M./deformed Chinese survivors of Japanese medical experiments (take your pick) were all supposedly placed in a German Horten flying wing craft lofted by balloon with a nuclear reactor to test them for reaction to radiation at high-altitudes. This is all based on nothing more than the tales of a few unidentified elderly counterintelligence agents who admit they know one another. The theory is total B.S. on about 100 different levels (which is why the book is often referred to as "BS in the Desert").

Similarly, two years ago, the critically-challenged Anne Jacobsen put out a book about Area 51 with a preposterous extra chapter devoted to an anonymous witness saying the Roswell beings were really deformed, surgically-altered children manufactured by Nazi medical criminal Josef Mengele for Josef Stalin, placed in the usual captured Nazi secret aircraft and somehow precisely guided thousands of miles to crash in the middle of nowhere and give the U.S. a Martian invasion scare. Supposedly the wreckage and now-comatose survivors made it to Area 51 where he supposedly saw them. Again, totally idiotic on 100 different levels. The witness was soon identified and admitted he was just trying to help Jacobsen sell books.

About the most credible alternate conventional theory I've heard was advanced by researcher Joseph Stefula who started out as a big Roswell skeptic. However, after interviewing one very credible Roswell witness who said he saw the heavily-guarded crash site north of town with large burn areas, was told of radiation at the site and bodies of the crew taken to the base hospital, Stefula came to the conclusion that something indeed big had happened at Roswell. He hypothesized that maybe it was the crash of a B-29 doing a secret "dirty-bomb" or radioactive dispersal experiment but admitted he had absolutely no evidence to support it. At least there are no Nazi super-secret aircraft or teenage mutant Ninjas involved in this theory, the type of experiment is semi-plausible, and it is understandable why it might be covered up at the time in a heavy-handed way. But there are no historical records nor witness testimony to support this scenario. Yet there have been dozens of publicly acknowledged "broken arrow" nuclear accidents involving aircraft, such as one 3 years later where a B-29 with a nuke crashed outside of Albuquerque.

Roswell, also happened during the cold war, for all we know Roswell could have been part of a propaganda project, to put fear or intimidate the Russians etc, back then USA, was the technological power house, it was another 2 years before Russia tested there first atomic bomb. Nothing like trying to intimidate your enemy by proclaiming you have alien technology

.

It was also 2 years AFTER we already had the bomb. I would think having the A-bomb would be intimidating enough without trying to supposedly convince the Russians we also had alien technology. The Russians weren't stupid. They wouldn't think we could have such technology unless they also believed from their own intelligence flying saucers were indeed alien. And if they did so believe, they would also realize that such an advanced technology would probably take decades if not centuries before it might be replicated. Just having an advanced crashed craft does not automatically translate into now having the technology ready to go. You still have to figure out what it does, how it works, and how to engineer it, which is 99.9999% of the work.

Hello, and thank you for doing this. I've read your 'Witness to Roswell' book and it's easily the best Roswell-related book I've ever read.

I don't know if this has already been asked, but my question is:
You mentioned in one of your answers that, on the third crash site, there was a pod with three dead alien beings and one, still alive and walking about. Do you have any more information on that live one and, if so, could you speak a bit about it? Was it taken by the military and, if so, where?

Once more, thank you!

Originally posted by neformore
Tom has graciously agreed to join us on tonights ATS Live! Radio show - we'll be interviewing him in Hour 2

Click the image for more details

edit on 7/9/13 by neformore because: (no reason given)

Is there any reason there're no answers for any of the questions from page 5 up to page 18?
Or am I missing something?
Just asking..

Originally posted by Maverick7

Originally posted by K-PAX-PROT
Now it does not take a rocket scientist to work out and perceive that there is only two real possible origins here, secret military black ops; or ET technology, lets now try and work out why we should trust known liars, in ordinary life we all we not TRUST those who lie never mind three times.

I would say that there is another explanation.

Let's see what we can take for absolute truth.

Something strew debris over a 1/4 mile section of the Foster Ranch where Mac Brazel worked.

Brazel related that on June 14, 1947 he and 8-year-old son, Vernon came upon a large area of bright wreckage made up on rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks. (other accounts say it was Brazel's daugher Bessie who was with him).

Could the debris have been planted?

From this pile of debris, which Mac related to this to Sheriff Wilcox, who in turn related it to Maj. Jesse A. Marcel, we have a story about something crashing. Marcel and a man in plain clothes (possibly Sheridan Cavitt) were reported to have gone out to the ranch by jeep and picked up the remainder of the debris, all of which may have weighed about 5-10lbs.

How this got turned into a story of having "captured" a Flying Saucer, isn't easy to say. It smacks of a planned disinformation campaign. Whether that was to deflect from a 'real crash' elsewhere, or if it was a ploy to convince the Soviets during the cold war that we might have advanced technology, giving us an edge or perhaps diverting their intelligence to a dead end area, it's not known.

We then have various stories about bodies about Pappy Henderson being involved in flying something to Wright-Patterson, but beyond that no actual evidence.

Why people feel the need to jump to a 'non-terrestrial' explanation for a pile of loose debris is not clear. We all are intrigued by stores of this type.

edit on 7-9-2013 by Maverick7 because: (no reason given)

There is one big flaw with your presentation, its this, WHY did the authorities feel the need to lie and cover up something as simple and terrestrial as a large area of bright wreckage made up on rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks. Why then lie again and again, it just does not add up, the first statement about a crashed disk was the truth, why, because he did not have any protocols to follow because there was none to follow regarding a UFO crash/landing, he was just telling it like it was, that is the big transparent red flag..

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT


Why the need to 'cover up'?

I think the first part of the issue was possibly related to the supposed bounty the AF was offering for evidence and location of crashed objects. Mac Brazel, I think, believed he might have such a thing. The AF was supposedly offering $3,000 for such evidence and Mac allegedly conspiratorially whispered he might have a crashed saucer to the Sheriff.

From there the story ballooned into a press release by Walter Haut. Then they realized, possibly that here was an opportunity to spin a disinformation plot, but they had to be cagey. They'd release the story, then retract it and using various techniques, make it look like they were covering something up.

Suddenly, the powers higher up found out it might be related to the Mogul project and said 'stop, get the debris and stop sending reports and asking questions'.

So we had a lower level 'scheme' counteracted by a higher level authority making it look like a cover up in spades to the civilians and UFO fans.

Again, we really have -nothing- to relate it to a non-terrestrially piloted craft. Someone decided to embellish the tale with talk of bodies, and again we have a couple second person recountings and some non-recorded death bed comments that weren't recorded by Kevin Randall.

Read through the presentation here to give you a better scope of all of the misrepresentation and confusing stories that possibly lead to the whole tale. home.comcast.net...
HTH

I might have found an answer to what happened to the surviving alien, I don't know if it's true, I hope it's not.

There was a story/rumour going around the base that the surviving alien escaped from the base and was shot dead by the MPs at the main gate.

I also heard that the aliens were wearing tight fitting silver space/flight suits.

Originally posted by Maverick7
reply to post by K-PAX-PROT

 

Why the need to 'cover up'?

I think the first part of the issue was possibly related to the supposed bounty the AF was offering for evidence and location of crashed objects. Mac Brazel, I think, believed he might have such a thing. The AF was supposedly offering $3,000 for such evidence and Mac allegedly conspiratorially whispered he might have a crashed saucer to the Sheriff.

From there the story ballooned into a press release by Walter Haut. Then they realized, possibly that here was an opportunity to spin a disinformation plot, but they had to be cagey. They'd release the story, then retract it and using various techniques, make it look like they were covering something up.

Suddenly, the powers higher up found out it might be related to the Mogul project and said 'stop, get the debris and stop sending reports and asking questions'.

So we had a lower level 'scheme' counteracted by a higher level authority making it look like a cover up in spades to the civilians and UFO fans.

Again, we really have -nothing- to relate it to a non-terrestrially piloted craft. Someone decided to embellish the tale with talk of bodies, and again we have a couple second person recountings and some non-recorded death bed comments that weren't recorded by Kevin Randall.

Read through the presentation here to give you a better scope of all of the misrepresentation and confusing stories that possibly lead to the whole tale. home.comcast.net...
HTH

So how did the AF now about any crashed objects, if it was their balloon and as we were lead to believe by the AF at a latter date it was just a secret balloon test then WHY attract attention to it by not only offering a reward but involving citizens too???

Since when does the AF offer rewards for the recovery or the were about of its crashed secret military projects???? , The fact they changed this explanation is testimony that they DID NOT KNOW what crashed there , why, because it was never any secret project they also would not have drawn attention to it and there would never have been any reward or mention of it. The reward was borne out of a real fear to put a lid on it quickly, still i l find it very odd that the AF would not have done a retrieval or investigation themselves.

Really though are we expected to accept that the AF getting citizens to do their investigations "IF" this was even their THIRD explanation , why would Mac Brazil then make up a story about a flying saucer if he indeed had evidence of a terrestrial object??? why would a commanding officer release a press release sating a disk from another world had crashed landed without checking it first, why would he risk his job ect without really confirming it, again to many discrepancies, too many witnesses to perceive that this was just a terrestrial air force balloon, sorry i mean, now what was the other two explanations offered by the AF..... how many chances if any do you give those that lie once never mind three times...

Originally posted by TomCarey
reply to post by Maverick7

 

Playing word games, are we? There at least one in every barrel. By "education" and "training" I was referring to my formal education and the training that went along with it, which included my stint in the military. And one can research historical accounnts, which you demean as being just "stories," for their veracity and context regarding the subject at hand. In case you missed it, in courts of law credible testimony is considered "evidence," which has sent many a criminal to their ultimate fate.

Here here Tom!
Thankyou for your massive contribution.
A large proportion of which I instinctively believed is the case!
And yes I agree that it is either ET or our descendants that are the UFO phenomenon!
Common sense and information which is consistent and not contrived tends to be the factual root!
And the more evasive/avoiding the truth lies/smokeys etc only reaffirms the common sense!
Great work Tom.
Keep us informed of any new developments.
And yes I agree that disclosure wont happend and it is more likely to come from non terrrestial sources.
Best Wishes

I always wonder if there are photographs of the debris field(s), of whatever it was that crashed, taken back in 1947. The USAAF have never offered anything up as evidence to prove that this was nothing more than a weather balloon and no one else appears to have taken pictures either.

reply to post by mirageman


According to this thread there might be some photos, handed to members of Kevin Randle’s Dream team. Is that not Tom Carey or am I confused again ?

abovetopsecret.com