The Roswell Crash... Alien Spacecraft or Mogul Service Flight?

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: Ectoplasm8
Great thread! S&F!

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
If the Army back then had found the pile of foil and sticks as shown in a retraction story, then how could they have possibly mistaken that rubbish for a flying saucer that was said that they found, and a General was the one to first give the okay on that story?.

. I know first hand what liars military brass can be. They still haven't changed much.

Wasn't a balloon they first found. They found a balloon later after getting it, (oh look what we just found), so they could get pictures of it for the retraction story.

Brazel called it a "disk" because he was trying to collect a $3000 reward for a disk, so that explains where the "disk" idea came from, it was just reward oriented phrasing. The FBI memo put "Disc" in quotes indicating they didn't necessarily think that was an accurate description. Before Brazel found out about the $3000 reward, he didn't think much of what he found and told his daughter Bessie who was helping him pick it up it was "just a bunch of garbage".

This is Bessie Brazel's description of the "Disk", she helped her father pick up the debris when she was 14 years old:

Roswell Witness Bessie Brazel

Because, what Bessie said was:

"The debris looked like pieces of a large balloon which had burst. The pieces were small, the largest I remember measuring about the same as the diameter of a basketball. Most of it was a kind of double-sided material, foil-like on one side and rubber-like on the other... Sticks, like kite sticks, were attacked to some of the pieces with a whitish tape. The tape was about two or three inches wide and had flower-like designs on it. The 'flowers' were faint, a variety of pastel colors... The foil-rubber material could not be torn like ordinary aluminum foil... I do not recall anything else about the strength or other properties of what we picked up. We spent several hours collecting the debris and putting it into sacks. I believe we filled about three sacks... We speculated a bit about what the material could be. I remember dad (Mac Brazel) saying 'Oh, it's just a bunch of garbage.' "

When Bessie was shown the November/December 1990 issue of the International UFO Reporter (IUR), Pages 6, 7, and 8 of that issue showed the Roswell photographs. She later wrote:

"The debris shown does look like the debris we picked up."
(Jan 10, 1994 letter from Bessie Brazel Schrieber)

Even Randle admits that those photographs are of ML-307 radar target(s) and weather sounding balloon(s).

So the debris from a supposed crashed alien spaceship looks exactly like ML-307 radar targets and weather sounding balloons!

After reading that I fail to see how you can proclaim "Wasn't a balloon they first found."??

It certainly sounds like a balloon and radar targets, doesn't it?

One other thing: The man who made up the story about the bodies was one of the owners of the Roswell museum trying to drive traffic to his museum out in the middle of nowhere, but nobody ever seems to mention his ownership in the Roswell museum. We do know that there was never any nurse named "Naomi Maria Self" who he said was the Nurse who witnessed the bodies, so that's how we know he's lying.

Except the "disk" reference that the news papers used was given to them by the military. The military's press guys didn't tell the news "The farmer said it was a disk so we want to inform the public that we captured a flying saucer because a farmer called it that" I know from experience with the military just how good they are with misinformation, especially about saucers. The only people I know for a fact are lying are the military brass and counterintelligence when it comes to classified subjects like UFO's. And knowing how and why they lie about classified subjects is more important and more informative than what is said about some farmer who just wanted to collect some alleged reward.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

So, let me get this straight. A farmer says he has found a flying saucer on his ranch, and the military believe him before even setting eyes on the footage, so much so that they tell the media that it is a flying disc.

If it was project mogul, there is no way, absolutely no way in hell that they would mistake it for a crashed disc.

I do not know what happened in Roswell, but i still believe we are not being told the truth.

The sad fact is, the military could hold a press conference tomorrow saying that what crashed in Roswell was a secret military craft, and the same people who shouted weather balloon, and the project mogul, will believe that too, which could be right, but tells you that these people will believe whatever the government tells them

The purpose of this thread is to approach the case from the beginning before jumping ahead. Bringing to light some points that may be unknown and show the real possibility that this was a service flight crash. You can always use the excuse that those in the military are deceitful, but that would have to carry over to many fabricated documents, faked photographs of the period showing Mogul service flight launches (including service men ages), many lying within the military, and so on. The problem is there are facts that can be substantiated outside of the military.

The newspaper headline would be another thread. I think the word "captured" gives an idea to the mindset, depth of knowledge of this incident when published, and how it was jumping the gun for a story without full knowledge of the facts. There was no capture of a flying saucer. In Bob Pratts interview with Jesse Marcel, Marcel mentions the following about the break of the story:

So we loaded up and we came back to the base. In the meantime we had an eager-beaver public relations officer, he found out about it, he calls AP (Associated Press) about it. Then that’s when it really hit the fan.

The headline sounds more like a 3rd generation retelling of the story by an overzealous reporter.

This also wasn't the military's story. They didn't go out and capture a crashed saucer and with an *OOPS* retract what they said. It was a tale that began with Mac Brazel who initially ignores the debris for nearly a month before bringing it to Roswell. It then goes to the sheriff, the military, and probably others in the town. Jesse Marcel was familiar weather balloons and targets, possibly finding targets intact with a single radar target attached as the photos show above. He walks up on a debris field that would be 3 or 4 times the size of material that would be left behind if the typical weather balloon crashed and that was broken apart into many pieces. This scene would have been foreign to him and he would not have known what it was which lends more to the idea of what it could possibly be. Brazel's suggestion of a saucer filters into the possibilities. You have to understand 2017 mindset is not applicable to 1947. The term flying saucer was not connected to alien spacecraft as it is today. Spying Soviet craft could be a possibility as well.

I don't expect what I've presented will change the diehard believers mind. It will always be an alien spacecraft to this group. But the coincidences need to be addressed and not ignored. As long as I've been on the forum, I've yet to see anyone do that.

As being new here, I must applaud the OP for his great work. Very convincing. Thanks.

Excellent thread. You did some great research here. However, there is also ample evidence that suggests this was not a service flight crash:


The FBI memo collaborates what this guy says:

I wouldn't put it past the government to intimidate and threaten witnesses in order to hide the truth. How do we know for certain that Mac Bezell was just reciting a made up story that the USAF came up with to cover up the facts? Could it be that Brig. General Ramey was forced by government officials to change his initial statement regarding the flying disc that was recovered? Could it be that the ensuing weather balloon story and subsequent photo's holding "tin foil" was part of a massive debunking campaign? The USAF and our government did a great job smearing the truth on this event, because to this day, no one can DEFINITELY PROVE one way or another what actually happened at Roswell.

My late father was in the USAF from 1940 to 1965 and retired a Lieutenant. I always asked him about UFO's, especially Roswell. He always stated that you can't ever trust the government and that the truth will one day become known. He would never confirm or deny the existence of extraterrestrials, but gave me the impression he knew the truth. My dad passed away in 1995 and I wish I could've asked him one more time the day before he died. Will the truth ever become known?

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Excellent thread. You did some great research here.

Thanks.

However, there is also ample evidence that suggests this was not a service flight crash:

Who do we have to rely on for the story when it happened? We only have Mac Brazel's interview in the newspaper. Then 29 years later we have Jesses Marcels retelling of the story after speaking with Stanton Friedman. When you compare the basics of their descriptions, they match:

- They both mention a large debris field -- Which would be created with three or more radar targets forcibly hitting the ground breaking apart. Or, as I mentioned, if a subsequent storm blew the debris further along the property.

- They both mention no marks on the ground as if it exploded in the air -- This would describe the last balloon bursting with winds bringing the lightweight targets crashing to the ground as it did. In fact, winds blowing the targets down could further be supported by Jesse Marcel's comment:
"One thing I was impressed with was that it was obvious you could just about determine which direction it came from and which direction it was heading. It was traveling from northeast to southwest. It was in that pattern. You could tell where it started and where it ended by how it thinned out."

- They both mention finding small sticks -- These would be the wooden support beams of the radar targets.

- They both mention foil-like material -- This would be the reflective material need for tracking of the targets.

To believe Jesse Marcel is to believe Mac Brazel. The claim Brazel was coerced by the military makes no sense because his description negates the military's claim it was a weather balloon by Brazel saying it wasn't a weather balloon. He told the truth in his newspaper interview and went further to describe parts of a radar target down to the Scotch tape used that is noted in the ML307C/AP blueprint I posted and linked.

I'm not interested in tales 30, 40, 50+ years after the incident. Unfortunately it's a fact that people lie. Anyone can create a story for their moment of fame, for money, or whatever their personal reason. I could similarly point to "witnesses," as Arbitrageur did, such as Bessie Brazel and her comments about finding: "debris that looked like pieces of a large balloon, sticks like kite sticks, aluminum-like foil, tape" to further support my claim that it was nothing more than radar targets and a balloon. After 70 years, there's absolutely nothing to support any of these stories. To support them is to support a belief. The burden of proof lies with the claimant and it's come nowhere close to being met after many decades. Why should something as extraordinary as intelligent alien life be left to stories? What a way to undermine the incredible discovery of intelligent life in the universe by a game of he said, she said. Doesn't work for me and many others.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

The Roswell mortician or more correctly an embalmer, Glenn Dennis, has long been shown to have told porky pies and his story about the nurse (Naomi Selff). It just didn't add up under scrutiny. There were plenty of records available from 1947 and no such nurse existed. He even gave researcher Kevin Randle a false story about visiting the RAAF hospital.

You can read it all here : Kevin Randle Blogspot

The Guy Hottel FBI memo is a genuine memo. It is not new and was released under FOI in the late 1970s. Here it is :



It is about a hoax by a fraudster called Silas Newton. It opens stating “an investigator for the Air Forces stated that” three so-called flying saucers had been recovered in New Mexico.But it does not prove the existence of aliens at Roswell. It is nothing more than a second hand tale that was never investigated any further. It was also dated March 22nd 1950 some three years after the Roswell incident. Google "FBI Hottel Memo" and a full explanation can be found. Or visit IsaacKoi's thread on ATS : Debunked! The FBI alien bodies memo

Unfortunately these stories will continue to get recycled again and again.

a reply to: mirageman

Miragman why do you always want to spoil all the fun?

a reply to: Willtell

Who says I don't have fun?

This UFO, is UFO, a UFO, good UFO, way UFO, to UFO, keep UFO, everyone UFO, distracted UFO, for UFO, 20 UFO, seconds UFO!

Now read that out aloud without saying UFO and tell me that wasn't fun

July 8th 1947 Roswell Daily Recordwww.anglefire.com/indie/anna_jones1/daily_record.html

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
The purpose of this thread is to approach the case from the beginning before jumping ahead. Bringing to light some points that may be unknown and show the real possibility that this was a service flight crash. You can always use the excuse that those in the military are deceitful, but that would have to carry over to many fabricated documents, faked photographs of the period showing Mogul service flight launches (including service men ages), many lying within the military, and so on. The problem is there are facts that can be substantiated outside of the military.

The newspaper headline would be another thread. I think the word "captured" gives an idea to the mindset, depth of knowledge of this incident when published, and how it was jumping the gun for a story without full knowledge of the facts. There was no capture of a flying saucer. In Bob Pratts interview with Jesse Marcel, Marcel mentions the following about the break of the story:

So we loaded up and we came back to the base. In the meantime we had an eager-beaver public relations officer, he found out about it, he calls AP (Associated Press) about it. Then that’s when it really hit the fan.

The headline sounds more like a 3rd generation retelling of the story by an overzealous reporter.

This also wasn't the military's story. They didn't go out and capture a crashed saucer and with an *OOPS* retract what they said. It was a tale that began with Mac Brazel who initially ignores the debris for nearly a month before bringing it to Roswell. It then goes to the sheriff, the military, and probably others in the town. Jesse Marcel was familiar weather balloons and targets, possibly finding targets intact with a single radar target attached as the photos show above. He walks up on a debris field that would be 3 or 4 times the size of material that would be left behind if the typical weather balloon crashed and that was broken apart into many pieces. This scene would have been foreign to him and he would not have known what it was which lends more to the idea of what it could possibly be. Brazel's suggestion of a saucer filters into the possibilities. You have to understand 2017 mindset is not applicable to 1947. The term flying saucer was not connected to alien spacecraft as it is today. Spying Soviet craft could be a possibility as well.

I don't expect what I've presented will change the diehard believers mind. It will always be an alien spacecraft to this group. But the coincidences need to be addressed and not ignored. As long as I've been on the forum, I've yet to see anyone do that.

A few weeks Before Roswell Kenneth Arnold made reference to saucers he observed while flying over Washington state which was publicized so there WAS an connection in 1947. The Roswell incident occurred the first week of July and the newspaper published the story on July 8th so Mac Brazel did not ignore the debris for nearly a month. Have you actually read the original story printed in the July 8th 1947 issue of the Roswell Daily Record? Mac Brazel was a foreman on the Foster ranch..

The Air Force said that there were crash test dummies when they revisited the Roswell incident. Where do these fit into the Project Mogul balloon explanation?

I believe that in New Mexico there have been 2 aircraft crashes, the aliens have probably made a serious mistake, 2 ufos appeared in the same space and at the same time, flying machines were probably pushed away at very high speeds

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
The Air Force said that there were crash test dummies when they revisited the Roswell incident. Where do these fit into the Project Mogul balloon explanation?

Bodies observed in the New Mexico desert were probably test dummies," said Col. John Haynes, deputy chief of the Air Force Declassification Review Team. Haynes was referring to the findings of "The Roswell Report, Case Closed," a glossy Air Force study with a sinister alien-like bluish creature on its cover. The 224-page report seeks to quash any notion that the military is hiding the remains of extraterrestrials and remnants of their interstellar craft somewhere in the desert Southwest. All events can be explained as part of Air Force research projects -- none of which included or was assisted by space creatures, Haynes assured reporters. The alleged alien sightings date to the summer of 1947. Why did it take the Air Force so long to reach that conclusion? Haynes explained that the Air Force helped the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, in its 1994 report on Mogul, a high-altitude radar and sensor balloon program that the service claimed was responsible for debris found at Roswell. Shortly after that, Air Force officials uncovered film clips and evidence of other balloon tests and the test dummies, which were used in New Mexico beginning in 1953 and for the rest of the decade. UFO advocates in the Roswell area are likely confused about what they saw and what year, Haynes said. "We're confident once the report is out and digested by the public that this will be the final word on the Roswell incident," Haynes said. Maybe not. "Someone said they think the story of the dummies was put out by dummies," said Delores Blair, a staff member at the International UFO Museum and Research Center on Main Street in Roswell, where a 50th anniversary is expected to draw some 50,000 UFO enthusiasts next month. "I think it's another cover-up." Blair, who moved to this desert town in central New Mexico three years ago, brushed aside talk of confusion by area residents. "I think it's an insult to witnesses who were there in 1947," she said. Haynes was at a loss to explain why claims by UFO proponents of alien bodies in 1947 could have been off by at least six years, to 1953, when the Air Force dummies were first used.

Paying close attention to who said what here, especially the military's Colonel Haynes. He says people "probably" saw crash test dummies, (without the time machine that would have been needed for them to go 6 years into the future to when the military started to use them.)

The very fact that the military lies so badly and so often when it comes to the still very top secret subject of UFO's and aliens shows that the opposite is true. They basically want people to put their investments into horse manure with the suggestion to buy high and sell low.

originally posted by: meteoritelima
The Roswell incident occurred the first week of July and the newspaper published the story on July 8th so Mac Brazel did not ignore the debris for nearly a month. Have you actually read the original story printed in the July 8th 1947 issue of the Roswell Daily Record? Mac Brazel was a foreman on the Foster ranch..

So you didn't read the thread before replying to it? He said he found the debris on June 14 so yes he ignored it for several weeks at least:

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

TIMING OF CRASHED SAUCER AND MOGUL/SERVICE FLIGHT LAUNCHES

- Crashed Flying Saucer -

July 8, 1947 The Roswell Daily Record

Date Mac Brazel says he found the debris according to his newspaper interview:

Debris found June 14, 1947

Source

originally posted by: Cocchino
I believe that in New Mexico there have been 2 aircraft crashes, the aliens have probably made a serious mistake, 2 ufos appeared in the same space and at the same time, flying machines were probably pushed away at very high speeds

Where were the claims of alien bodies in 1947? There weren't any. Jesse Marcel Didn't mention any and neither did Mac Brazel, two of the key witnesses for the Roswell incident.

It was decades later when people started telling stories that they remembered from decades ago and the air force thinks people got the dates mixed up which trying to remember decades ago can certainly happen. But if you can find newspaper articles about Roswell from 1947 talking about the bodies, please post them, I'd love to see them. If you can't, you're just as confused as the air force claims other witnesses are, who are mixing up non-related events which happened long ago but not at the same time.

Also don't forget the most famous story about bodies told by Glenn Dennis said the witness was a nurse named Naomi Maria Self. There was never any such nurse. He made the story up, but he was smiling all the way to the bank when duped naive people believed his made up tale and went to visit the Roswell museum he owned.

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
The Air Force said that there were crash test dummies when they revisited the Roswell incident. Where do these fit into the Project Mogul balloon explanation?

I don't think the alien bodies part of the story is even worth arguing. It's a ridiculous fabrication that even the believers star eyewitness, Jesse Marcel, never mentions. If Marcel gave his story only once then died, someone would have most likely come out of the woodwork to claim he told them a story of seeing alien bodies. But Marcel lived another 8 years and never talked about seeing any bodies.

As far as the Air Force description of crash test dummies, I agree it's a ridiculous explanation. But it's an explanation they felt the need to search for because this tale had snowballed to so many "witnesses." They were giving an answer to a question that wasn't even a valid one. The answer (crash test dummies) is as absurd as the question (alien bodies). It was a mistake to even acknowledge this nonsense.

Believers were quick to say the Air Force was lying when it came to the first report, and quick to say the second report with the crash test dummy explanation is idiotic. The second had a path of documents, witnesses, photographs to follow to establish crash test dummies were used in the 50's. Just as there was a path of documents, witnesses, photographs etc. to follow with the Mogul program and service and research flight launches in the first week in June 1947. The Air Force kept true to both dates and documentation, giving the 1950's date for the use of dummies combined with false memories as reasoning. If there was a great evil UFO/alien cover up or conspiracy, why no lying here? Why not change documents or use witnesses to say dummies were used in the late 40's? Why not create a secret program such as Mogul to explain away the dummy use in 1947? Why not lie here to close the gap? After all, we're supposedly dealing with a conniving group of people willing to do anything to hide this great secret.

Hm, I always thought that project Mogul didn't start until 1952... Interesting!

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
The Air Force said that there were crash test dummies when they revisited the Roswell incident. Where do these fit into the Project Mogul balloon explanation?

Oh they don't fit at all.
Dummies were a separate different explanation
for the same event. Because the truth requires
3 explanations and they think we are time compressed
dummies.

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
The Air Force said that there were crash test dummies when they revisited the Roswell incident. Where do these fit into the Project Mogul balloon explanation?

Clinton ordered a reinvestigation, but it was never taken seriously, they just wanted to provide an explanation to make the story go away. And it cuts both ways, maybe the Airforce couldnt find any evidence because it was discovered in 47 there was nothing to the story so it was just thrown away. Or someone really does have the stuff and it is hidden away somewhere in an underground base still being studied.

Some other threads for those who want more discussion

Roswell for dummies

The Case for Roswell

Other sources
Kevin Randles Blog . Lots of discussion about Mogul there as well, Kevin doesnt buy the Mogul explanation. And there is debate/bickering/hate back and forth about it with skeptics for those who read the comments . Its worth noting that Kevin has taken a more skeptical position towards Roswell lately, saying it is mystery.

Roswell Proof by David Rudiak. Pro alien craft all the way.

Well, if it really only was a Mogul balloon, why all the different cover stories from the air force over the years?
Did all the witnesses of the bodies lie to the investigators?
Why rush things to Wright AF under strictest security if it was just some balloon parts?

Some years ago, while researching the Soviet space program, I made the acquaintance of a senior Defense Intelligence Agency official. In a discussion of the technique of military intelligence. Unaware of my side interest in UFO lore, he related a story he had been told by his instructors at the Defense Intelligence School at Anacostia, Maryland, in the mid-1950s. As an example of the exactly WRONG approach to 'military intelligence', he described an example of a base intelligence officer who had decided that he had discovered a crashed flying saucer and that the country needed to know about it right away. My source explained that all base intelligence officers were tasked with collecting raw intelligence and passing it, in full detail, to the professional analysts at headquarters, where its significance can be determined. They were specifically instructed NOT to reach any conclusions about the meaning of what they found because, he explained, any theory, once implanted in the mind of a data collector, becomes a subconscious editor of what subsequent facts are stressed, what facts are considered distracting or unimportant, what facts support the on-site officer's conclusions and require elaboration or speculation or reinforcement in the narrative. He told me that the intelligence officer in the flying saucer case [he did not mention Roswell] was held up for ridicule and disapproval for many years at the school, as a lesson on what to NEVER do when out in the field collecting raw intelligence information. He was an object of ridicule, and professional condemnation.