The Roswell Deception

a reply to: Jay-morris

I was simply pointing out that if you are a Mogulist, there is at least a real contemporaneous project on which to base your beliefs, even if those beliefs are ultimately not true. ET proponents only have decades later collected witness testimony as the basis for their beliefs.

Interestingly the premise of the book is NOT only about Roswell, according to what I read. Mr. Carrion is postulating a more generalized conspiracy even outside of Roswell that avers the IC has manipulated the UFO phenomenon.
I know I have to read the book, something I will eventually get around to doing.

But on its face, this idea has challenges…

Here’s what I mean.
Regarding this idea, it dawns on me that it is important to designate what particular agency: CIA, MI,( some special group like MJ12) particularly ran this deception since some within the same IC were dealing with the UFO phenomenon on another level and one we have substantial information regarding. In other words, we KNOW some of the government took UFOS at face value. So either they weren’t in the loop about this or we are being deceived greatly…a definite possibility.

I mean, then, the Robertson panel, blue book, The Condon Committee; were they all subterfuge?

What I’m getting at is the fact that the IC is not homogeneous therefore one agency might be doing one thing and another might not know about it.

Such a situation it seems to me would entail one overall presiding agency to oversee such an operation

a reply to: Willtell

It is not a conspiracy theory but documented deception. Read the book and the supporting evidence.

I point out in the book specifically the agencies/people involved with the overall presiding agency being the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

- The 1947 Joint Chiefs of Staff
- 1947 Joint Security Control - subordinate to the Joint Chiefs of Staff
- 1947 War Department's Plans and Operations division
- The Central Intelligence Group (CIG) personnel working at the Joint Counterintelligence Center (a joint CIG, Army Navy project)
- The Navy's OP-32-Y1

As for whether the Robertson Panel, Blue Book and the Condon Committee were subterfuge, that requires further analysis and research. I focus just on the events of 1947.

a reply to: jamescarrion

The unstoppable force meeting the immovable object is how I see the arguments for and against most cases in this field.

It's an eternal merry-go-round where little other than people arguing their belief, based on evidence and not.

Sad isn't it..if as much effort was put into actual scientific analysis and investigation, we would probably be in a much better place of understanding.

a reply to: Jay-morris

Yes and fair enough. It's no good just "believing" from our own hunches. Even though that's what we often go on. We should try to establish some common ground and what are the core facts to the case. What can we say are absolute facts in the Roswell Case though? By that I mean ones that almost everyone agrees upon?

Scrounger did make a reasonable attempt : here

I would say that the indisputable details are:

1. Something was found by Mac Brazel scattered across the Foster Ranch between mid-June and early July. He stored it until a later date.

2. On July 6th 1947, Brazel drove into Roswell, New Mexico with samples of the material he'd found.

3. On July 8th 1947, the Roswell AAF base press release was reported across various news sources - "RAAF Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch in Roswell Region". Bearing in mind that the term flying saucer had only been coined a week earlier and did not have the same connotations it did in later years.



4. A day later it was retracted and reported as a weather balloon.

5. Until 1978 this story was virtually dead and buried. Then Jesse Marcel opened his mouth......

6. In the 1990s the USAF report attempted to explain this away as Mogul balloon without giving absolute proof that it was.

originally posted by: jamescarrion
a reply to: scrounger

And I challenge you to stop doing the time warp and stay focused on when the events occurred - 1947

I have and repeatededly so. along with what the government reported (with flaws thereof) , maj marcell, and other sources. focus (especially with SPECIFIC comments, challenges, ect being answered) isnt my problem

I drive my beat up old jeep into the desert and it dies ... I leave it there... poof - we have wreckage in the desert that was never airborne...it is that simple... to be an airborne crash requires that someone saw it fly in the first place...

Um no. Like your attempt at "what evidence of a crash, its not stated" you argue definitions (like define what is is). if you leave your jeep in the desert its ABANDONED vehicle. NOT a crash. it isnt a crash unless it has (due to some exterior force) been turned (at least partially) into scattered pieces . but your last part "to be an airborn crash requires that someone saw it fly in the first place" is LAUGHABLE in its lack of common sense. there are THOUSANDS of crashes of airborn vehicles that "no one saw fly in the first place". common if your gonna deflect you can do better

If you can somehow stay present in 1947, newspapers report EXACTLY what Brazel recovered...and suffice it to say that it sounds EXACTLY like a weather balloon or a kite ...

no the newspapers reported what THE MILITARY said it was.. A story that has changed as more investigaions, officall government reports, ect have come out. Insisting on "staying in 1947" by only claiming that reports at that time are accurate is not intelectually honest. now add to that the fact "it sounds exactly like" is NOT PROOF. you cant go into a debate , court room or discussion and say "sounds like" as proving anything by itself. to use an example you can say "officer it sounds exactly like my neighbor is shooting at my house with a gun". but when one demands PROOF you find its firecrackers and your WRONG. your assumptions what it sounds like is accurate is NOT FACT... Again disproven deflection

So unless you can show SOME proof from 1947 that something exotic was seen flying over Roswell and someone saw it crash and someone recorded contemporaneously the recovery of an exotic machine..your alien theory is forced...and forced by belief..because you have no evidence... Instead, you try to weave a story that spans decades to fit your belief...

You haven't read my book, because if you had, you would notice that the human deception theory for Roswell doesn't care what was recovered at Roswell..it has supporting data to substantiate the theory without needing a time machine or contrived proof...the original documentation is available for you to read for yourself...and that is all I am asking you to provide ...ORIGINAL documentation from the time the event occurred that states specifically that something exotic crashed (tin foil and wood and rubber is not exotic)...you can't ... so you keep trying to turn the table and have me prove your alien theory is a possibility...when it has zero supporting evidence

for once your honest on something.. your providing evidence to back up YOUR THEORY. But in your whole rant you have not PROVEN what crashed there (ignoring the fact you keep wanting to debate that there was no crash) . You say "origional documentation" as proof it is your theory. but the government ITSELF has changed the story what it was (to refresh, weather balloon, project mogul , among others) . so unless your gonna say the government itself (who you seem to rely on when its convient) has changed evidence. your just picking and choosing what evidence fits your THEORY. you also IGNORE the inconvienent evidence from maj marcel (a decorated military man with secret clearance) that it wasnt "tin foil and wood and rubber". you have not provided ANY EVIDENCE why he would lie and risk his reputation, miltary secrecy oaths, ect. there is evidence to support THE POSSIBLITY/ THEORY it could be an alien probe or craft. but since it doesnt fit your THEORY anything of such nature must be false.

Your "facts" are not even facts: For example:

"That night there was a severe electrical storm" - says who? First you have to be able to establish the night the event occurred..i.e. your alleged crash ... to be able to correlate it with a weather range

actually many authors have pointed out the weather over the range of dates to INCLUDE the military timeline... in fact the very newspapers you use when convient give the weather reports of the time

"The military cordoned off the area" ... says who in 1947? That is your time machine witness data from decades later...

the military itself in later reports say there was a recovery. Maj marcel said there was a recovery, many witnesses reported it and a reporter reported it as well... so your saying they just left the weckage on the ground of a "secret project" that your book source says so the russians can see though the deception? common you cant even keep your theory train straight

"the rancher was taken away by the military for a few days then would not talk about it. " ...says who in 1947? That is your time machine witness data from decades later...

no reports from reporters, researchers ect have stated over the decades. no "time machine" needed. BTW do you have a "time machine" to prove all your claims?

"the military flew wreckage away to other bases and the whole project was hushed up. " ... says who in 1947? I have a 1947 newspaper article that states the "wreckage" never left Fort Worth. What do you have from 1947 that states otherwise?

common now. your not even trying to keep a stable train of thought. the MILITARY gave the story of "the weather balloon" . did they have total access to a SECRET military base/group to know what they were doing? add to it if they (as stated) picked up wreckage they just dumped it in the garbage for wed pickup? add to it as been posted here members of the transportation unit (dealing with secret projects like the a bomb) told reserchers they flew "something secret" to other bases.. oh wait thats right. because it doesnt serve your THEORY their memories are suspect. to use your logic... do you have a "time machine" to prove what was going in and out of the base .. you know PROOF

You get my drift here? I know it is painful to abide by evidentiary standards, but unless you are willing to do that... you keep blowing hot air based on belief...and contribute nothing to the resolution of the mystery...

AHH "blowing hot air"... no presenting alternate and supported THEORIES of what it COULD HAVE BEEN. I have clearly stated that it could be a balloon, project mogul, another secret project or alien . I stated CLEARLY I dont know and want PROOF not MORE THEORIES. You have stated over and over it cant possibly be alien, everyone giving evidence is "not remembering accurately", a DECORATED military person is lying , and in short blasting every possible theory not listed in your book. along with you CANNOT PROVE what crashed there and even your book doesnt confirm what it was. In fact you keep saying "you havent read my book" but no quotes, facts, ect POSITIVELY ID what crashed.

a reply to: jamescarrion

to continue...

all your stating is ANOTHER THEORY and trying to disprove other theories.

well if your gonna say "it cant be what your saying" then YES its up to you to PROVE your theory IS FACT.

Your trying to say there was no crash, using an abandoned jeep in the desert is a crash, and other comments are intellectually dishonest and not even a good deflection .

again FACTS

Something crashed near roswel
the military collected wreckage
they have CHANGED THEIR STORY many times in OFFICIAL REPORTS .

no one , not you, I or many others here can give PROOF POSITIVE what it was.

even the government (who alot here arguing with me) cant keep its story straight in OFFICIAL REPORTS.

other secret projects like the U2, sr71, and some same era spy satellites we have specs, missions, pilots (if applicable) dates times, ect of the whole damn projects. All of which were as secret as what is claimed to be the crash at roswell. but for some reason 70 plus years later it has to still be a secret?

we cant say (for example).....
on XX day in 1947 outside of roswell we launched the spy balloon peeping tom 7 carrying project peek a boo module to go on mission 69 to outer BFE russia to monitor their testing of the atomic bongs.
unfortunately there was a mechanical fault with the unit and it crashed . we had to keep it secret then to prevent the KGB stripper spies from discovering our tech.
now we can reveal all the equipment to the public to show the hard work of our military people , the scientific hard work. yadda yadda yadda .

we did this with the U2 which came out just 7 years later.

but it has not happened .

untill it does you can mock other theories, say their evidence is all fake, false , mis remembered, lied, ect that doesnt help your particular theory (be balloon, alien, mogul, ect) .

but until COLD HARD CONFIRMED FACTS PROVE EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS... every theory is in play.

Unlike some here until that happens I am willing to entertain all the theories and again state I DONT KNOW WHAT IT WAS AND NEITHER DO YOU.

scrounger

originally posted by: Jay-morris
a reply to: jamescarrion

Debunkers who believe Roswell to be a Mogul balloon have 1947 evidence upon which to base their beliefs.

That is not true. The same old people believed that official story because it went against the ET theory, simple as that. Anyone could see (without relying on their beliefs) that the weather balloon explanation did not make sense, and project Mogal did not make sense, but people still chose to believe them.

Your theory could very well be right, but it is just a theory. I do not think we will ever get to the bottom of this. But out of all the theories I have come across, yours is the most plausible.

The obvious lack of deep research and the self assured, convictive tone of how anyone that doesn't follow your belief (or supposed on-the-fence stance) come to their conclusions is the reason people like you or scrounger shouldn't be taken seriously. You really have nothing new and productive to bring to the argument and only stand on the shoulders of others like Stanton Friedman who tell you what to believe. You need to stop following and research a little more. I know you like to seem unbiased and undecided, but you weigh far more and argue in support of the alien answer than an Earthly grounded one.

I still don't understand it though, it's like some form of mental gymnastic denial or reverse psychology where those that argue and rely solely on faith, hope, stories, and belief try to make themselves out to be the grounded rational and logical ones. Meanwhile those who do actual research using factual data, original sources, etc. are claimed to be irrational, illogical and off base. And this is with a phenomenon that's been given many decades and many thousands of claims to produce something alien and giving us nothing of evidentuary value.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

another rant claiming those that even hint at a possibility of it being alien in nature are "not bringing anything to the discussion" or "standing on XX persons comments" and other such clap trap.

I will ask ONE QUESTION that destroys your rants .


WHAT EXACTLY (BACKED UP BY VERIFIABLE PROOF) DID CRASH AT ROSWELL IN 1947?

Unless you can answer that AND NOT ATTEMPT TO USE A THEORY AS FACT then your claims that XX theory is right and YY theory is wrong is just YOUR BELIEF in one theory only.

Scrounger

a reply to: mirageman

I also think the wording in the headline is a giveaway of how overzealous and excited a small town newspaper was, thinking they had the run on a huge story for the nation. Jesse Marcel even said:
"...meantime we had an eager-beaver public relations officer, he found out about it, he calls the AP about it and that's when it hit the fan."

What was described by the headline doesn't even fully match the story and I think shows the excitement:
RAAF Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch in Roswell Region
- A local rancher found the debris, not the RAAF.
- Nothing was captured, it was walked up on and discovered in many pieces on the property.
- The phrase "flying saucer" didn't necessarily carry the same meaning in recent post-war 1947 as it would today.
- With the development of nuclear weapons, paranoia of attacking countries through different methods such as the Fu-Go Japanese balloon bombs was high.

People mistakenly want to apply a late 20th/early 21st century mindset to 1947 America.

a reply to: scrounger

One more time in excitable language you can understand:

GO TO MY THREAD AND POKE HOLES IN THE THEORY THERE.

Otherwise, I'm done wasting energy on responding to you.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

I dont have to "poke holes" in your theory.

because unlike your continued rants i accept it as A THEORY with some plausibility.

what you cant seem to grasp and try to deflect with your (and to be fair your not the only one) rants is THEORY IS NOT FACT.

You have a THEORY with some believable and verifiable evidence.

so does the other theories (outside of it was elvis coming to america LOL) INCLUDING alien craft.

the COLD HARD TRUTH is one is not required to "poke holes in your theory" except in good civil debate to prove another theory is fact.

the one posing the theory to MAKE IT FACT has to provide VERIFIABLE PROOF .

we can poke holes in it all day and to be quite frank if you wish me to I will be more than happy (and I believe I already have btw) to.

but to be intellectually honest does not make a theory alien craft fact to do so.

UNTIL AND ONLY UNTIL one can provide CLEAR VERIFIABLE PROOF / FACTS of what crashed in roswell each theory (so far nothing , weather balloon, project mogul, an alien craft, a government deception campaign (being latest theory) to those keeping track) has valid and non valid points for debate.

where you (along with some very vocal others) and I differ is I OPENLY ADMIT I DONT KNOW which theory is true and I AM WILLING TO SAY ANY OF THEM COULD BE.

you and others are insistent yours is FACT but STILL CANNOT PROVIDE PROOF/FACTS to change THEORY TO FACT.

so rant on, name call, and be hypocritical to your hearts content... in the end all you have is A THEORY .
one with as much "holes" as any other.

Scrounger

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

originally posted by: Jay-morris
a reply to: jamescarrion

Debunkers who believe Roswell to be a Mogul balloon have 1947 evidence upon which to base their beliefs.

That is not true. The same old people believed that official story because it went against the ET theory, simple as that. Anyone could see (without relying on their beliefs) that the weather balloon explanation did not make sense, and project Mogal did not make sense, but people still chose to believe them.

Your theory could very well be right, but it is just a theory. I do not think we will ever get to the bottom of this. But out of all the theories I have come across, yours is the most plausible.

The obvious lack of deep research and the self assured, convictive tone of how anyone that doesn't follow your belief (or supposed on-the-fence stance) come to their conclusions is the reason people like you or scrounger shouldn't be taken seriously. You really have nothing new and productive to bring to the argument and only stand on the shoulders of others like Stanton Friedman who tell you what to believe. You need to stop following and research a little more. I know you like to seem unbiased and undecided, but you weigh far more and argue in support of the alien answer than an Earthly grounded one.

I still don't understand it though, it's like some form of mental gymnastic denial or reverse psychology where those that argue and rely solely on faith, hope, stories, and belief try to make themselves out to be the grounded rational and logical ones. Meanwhile those who do actual research using factual data, original sources, etc. are claimed to be irrational, illogical and off base. And this is with a phenomenon that's been given many decades and many thousands of claims to produce something alien and giving us nothing of evidentuary value.

Thank you so much for proving my point! See how powerful belief is? I do not agree with you, so that must mean I am in the ET csmp!

You have just proven that believers and people like you are exactly the same! Clearly it's more about belief than the truth.

Please look at my past posts on this forum, and please post where I stated thst ufos are ET?

UFOS are called ufos for a reason! They are unexplained! I do not know what they are, you do not know what they are. All we can do is speculate, no matter how much of an " expert" you are, or how clever you think you are!

You rely on your belief on just as much as the believers does. Your post proves this!

a reply to: scrounger

Writing long and angry posts doesn't make your arguments any more persuasive. When you are calmed down, send me your 1947 documentation, instead of demanding everyone else prove what crashed at Roswell.

You obviously took the time to read other author's books on Roswell because you keep quoting their assertions, even those that have no basis in fact. I get it, not everyone can be a researcher. Just don't be a blind follower and accept what anybody writes as truth, including my book. Read and question - I provide the tools to do that in the form of original documentation. BTW, if you are going to summarily disregard that documentation because you don't trust the Government and believe the Government lies and therefore nothing written can be trusted, then don't read my book because it is a lost cause.

originally posted by: Jay-morris

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

originally posted by: Jay-morris
a reply to: jamescarrion

Debunkers who believe Roswell to be a Mogul balloon have 1947 evidence upon which to base their beliefs.

That is not true. The same old people believed that official story because it went against the ET theory, simple as that. Anyone could see (without relying on their beliefs) that the weather balloon explanation did not make sense, and project Mogal did not make sense, but people still chose to believe them.

Your theory could very well be right, but it is just a theory. I do not think we will ever get to the bottom of this. But out of all the theories I have come across, yours is the most plausible.

The obvious lack of deep research and the self assured, convictive tone of how anyone that doesn't follow your belief (or supposed on-the-fence stance) come to their conclusions is the reason people like you or scrounger shouldn't be taken seriously. You really have nothing new and productive to bring to the argument and only stand on the shoulders of others like Stanton Friedman who tell you what to believe. You need to stop following and research a little more. I know you like to seem unbiased and undecided, but you weigh far more and argue in support of the alien answer than an Earthly grounded one.

I still don't understand it though, it's like some form of mental gymnastic denial or reverse psychology where those that argue and rely solely on faith, hope, stories, and belief try to make themselves out to be the grounded rational and logical ones. Meanwhile those who do actual research using factual data, original sources, etc. are claimed to be irrational, illogical and off base. And this is with a phenomenon that's been given many decades and many thousands of claims to produce something alien and giving us nothing of evidentuary value.

Thank you so much for proving my point! See how powerful belief is? I do not agree with you, so that must mean I am in the ET csmp!

You have just proven that believers and people like you are exactly the same! Clearly it's more about belief than the truth.

Please look at my past posts on this forum, and please post where I stated thst ufos are ET?

UFOS are called ufos for a reason! They are unexplained! I do not know what they are, you do not know what they are. All we can do is speculate, no matter how much of an " expert" you are, or how clever you think you are!

You rely on your belief on just as much as the believers does. Your post proves this!

you hit the nail on the head.

alot of people on both sides think belief in their theory is fact.

if you can "poke holes" in someones theory somehow it changes your theory/belief into fact.

fact /proof is fact and does not require one to "believe it" to be valid or true.

as you and I have stated many many times.

all we have is theories and most have some evidence that precludes dismissing them.

what alot cant accept no matter how thought out, researched , testimony ect you have unless you can (to be specific in this case but applies to all ufo cases) PROVE WITH FACTS EXACTLY WHAT crashed in roswell most of the theories are still in play.

yes even alien craft.

but outside of you and I (and maybe a few others) most are claiming their THEORY is the truth and anyone else is a "believer".

scrounger

Interesting thread, MM.

I haven't managed to read all of it yet, so forgive me if this has already been discussed, but I see one major flaw with the deception angle.

If Project Mogul was real, and highly classified, why would they encourage the Soviets to poke around in the area where it was ongoing?

Wouldn't it be better to stage it somewhere else?

If you want to misdirect, then surely you could do better than to misdirect the enemy into believing that there was a secret project going on in a location where there was, indeed, a secret project in full swing?

And, knowing Mogul was indeed using balloons, to use "weather balloon" as the official explanation seems a bit strange.

Why did they want the opposition to look into a secret project, and if it could be a balloon, when Mogul was being pursued?

All I can think of would be that Mogul was already abandoned as an useful idea, and this was some way of getting a bit of misdirection out of a failed project. But Mogul lasted until 1949 and was allegedly moderately successful (yet expensive) so calling attention to it in 1947 seems a bit high risk to me.

I haven't gotten around to reading the pdf yet, so maybe this is part of his theory?

Nice find, anyway.

BT

originally posted by: beetee
Interesting thread, MM.

I haven't managed to read all of it yet, so forgive me if this has already been discussed, but I see one major flaw with the deception angle.

If Project Mogul was real, and highly classified, why would they encourage the Soviets to poke around in the area where it was ongoing?

Wouldn't it be better to stage it somewhere else?

If you want to misdirect, then surely you could do better than to misdirect the enemy into believing that there was a secret project going on in a location where there was, indeed, a secret project in full swing?

And, knowing Mogul was indeed using balloons, to use "weather balloon" as the official explanation seems a bit strange.

Why did they want the opposition to look into a secret project, and if it could be a balloon, when Mogul was being pursued?

All I can think of would be that Mogul was already abandoned as an useful idea, and this was some way of getting a bit of misdirection out of a failed project. But Mogul lasted until 1949 and was allegedly moderately successful (yet expensive) so calling attention to it in 1947 seems a bit high risk to me.

I haven't gotten around to reading the pdf yet, so maybe this is part of his theory?

Nice find, anyway.

BT

It was not project Mogal. Anyone who looked into this case without belief on either side pretty much new that. This who thread kind of proves to me thst no matter what official explanation comes out, or other explanations comes out, certain people will always believe these explanations one by one if it goes against the ET explanation. It's clearly because of belief.

This explanation could be true. But it does not matter if it's true or not. Same people will believe it's true because it goes against the ET explanation.

I do not think we will ever know the real truth.

a reply to: beetee

Mr Carrion would be better placed to answer your point.

Soviet spies would be in the area already given that Roswell AAF was one of the few (perhaps only?) air bases to house nuclear weapons. And part of the deception plan (if you read the book) was also to break the Eastern bloc's diplomatic code.

Project Mogul was indeed secret at the time. But the balloon launches, the equipment used and science itself was not classified. The purpose of the project however was. Attempting to get the balloon trains to reach and maintain a certain altitude was the goal. That would then mean they could be used over the Soviet Union.

A little over half way through the book, and so far the research is pretty impressive.

I haven't been fact checking as I read, of course, but it certainly seems like a lot of work has gone into this.

Well worth a read, in my opinion.

BT

a reply to: mirageman

I've taken my time reading this excellent thread, and honestly, I'm still working my way through Mr Carrion's book.

There's one small thing I'd like to add.

Annie Jacobsen's Area 51, like Phenomenon, drops the bombshell near the end. Her source claims that Roswell was a Soviet hoax involving human experimentation. If I remember correctly, Knapp knows who her source is, and in the 20th Century, this former military man was claiming that Roswell was a genuine crashed UFO.

One thing that has always bugged me is why investigators assume that potential witnesses to various aspects were threatened or paid to stay quiet about Roswell? Why not pay them to talk?

Ultimately, I think some truth to what Roswell was, can be found in the origins of the Moore / Berlitz / Freidman book on Roswell, rather than the contents of the book itself. I suspect it was as random in the timing of its release as Phenomenon, 37th Parallel and American Cosmic.