Roswell explained? Potential NEW evidence!

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Sun Feb 25, 2007 8:54 pm

I don't read this b.s. anymore. Sorry.
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg


Postby ryguy » Sun Feb 25, 2007 8:59 pm

Access Denied wrote:Anyway, give me some time to respond to your latest post. I’m enjoying the conversation too but I promised my wife I was done with UFO stuff and this is taking a lot longer than I expected. I really need to wrap this all up at some point soon and move on to bigger and better things LOL.


haha...don't we all. This is a tarbaby few people escape from my friend. ;)

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby Access Denied » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:26 am

Serpentime wrote:Your posting (and the questions of another friend earlier last year) are the only impetus that I’ve had to review the “case” - at all - in years. Nevertheless, the two of you have given me good opportunity and perspectives to consider, and for that, I cannot complain.

~ That was exactly why I (personally) invited you to post your material.

Thank you, I appreciate your interest. I imagine many researchers have made their peace with Roswell and liken it to beating a dead horse yet it never ceases to amaze me how it continues to define UFOlogy 30 years after it was “resurrected” by SF. Take away Roswell and suddenly the picture becomes much clearer (to me anyway) yet many refuse to let it die… perhaps because of it’s demonstrated ability to “convert” the unwashed masses?

If so that’s unfortunate because in the end I think it only serves to distance those looking for answers from the truth… that is assuming one is unable to discover it for themselves eventually… which IMHO is the only true to path enlightenment.

Serpentime wrote:As I offered in my previous post, my own consideration of all of the claims, and most of the people making them, left me with very little confidence that the version(s) of events that were being repeated held any realistic validity.

Amen. But it sure makes for a great story doesn’t it?

Serpentime wrote:The “Marcel” version of the story is the best substantiated, I believe, (relatively speaking, that is) but even this account tends to fall apart (IMO) in light of some serious inconsistencies offered in Marcel’s own testimony.

That’s putting it mildly IMO. Personally I think Brazel’s story is the only one that’s substantiated since it was the only one I’m aware of that was documented at the time it happened. Any story that deviates from that mundane scenario should immediately be suspect… if there was anything to it why did it take 30 years to surface?

Serpentime wrote:Essentially – it seems to me – the discerning Inquirer is left with a choice between the different interpretations of relevant events and statements as they are presented by opposing polemicists. Neither side (IMO, and in the witness cases that I cited) has offered sufficient facts to establish an ironclad conclusion.

In other words: ~ Your way, my way, or the way it really happened. LOL

Sad but true.

Serpentime wrote:For Easely and Rickett to suffer from dementia does not seem unreasonable, but for such established (?) “witnesses” to forget that Aliens and UFOs are patently ridiculous - and a bunch of total nonsense to any properly educated person – begs my personal curiosity just a little bit.

In other words – in a “sane” and “normal” world – had I been either Easley or Rickett, I would have simply told Randle (and anyone else that may have been “pressuring” me) that they were totally insane, and that they should stop calling me and coming to my house before I (or my family) notified the Sheriff’s office (or the “Funny Farm”).

And yet – for some reason – they didn’t?

~ I certainly would have – dementia or not. And that’s not an unreasonable suggestion, in my opinion. Nor would it be a difficult decision.

Good point. Why does anybody lie? Perhaps they had an “agenda” of their own? Is it possible they were aware of the (then still) classified nature of what really crashed in Roswell?

Serpentime wrote:Why did General Exon make such an unusual statement, and THEN fail to retract it when he was given ample opportunity?

Was his admission that he had no first-hand knowledge not a form of retraction (or a disclaimer) in your opinion?

Serpentime wrote:There’s no logical reason that SA [Blackened out] should have been evaluating such a silly story. It’s obviously ridiculous, isn’t it?

But why did the AF source bother SA [Blackened out] with it in the first place? And why did Hoover want this type of silliness forwarded to his attention when he had so many other serious things to be doing? (and especially since Bureau Bulletin #57 plainly instructed otherwise?)

Then again, many of Hoover’s detractors have accused him of having a poor character. Perhaps that explains his “credulity” and “irrationality”?

To be personally interested in “flying saucers” (whatever they were) – despite rescinding his own prior Bureau Bulletin #42 (7/30/1947) for Collection relevant to the “phenomenon” (in a fit of “intra-service” pique) – doesn’t seem very logical, does it?

Perhaps the USAF was playing an elaborate hoax on its “rival” – the FBI?

Good questions… or perhaps the [blacked out] informant was a “person of interest” for some other reason?

Nick Redfern wrote an interesting article related to this…

Incident at Aztec
Fortean Times 181 March 2004
http://www.forteantimes.com/articles/181_aztec4.shtml

Secondly, a further fascinating piece of documentary evidence relative to the Aztec case has surfaced, thanks to the investigative author and (shock-horror!) former CIA man, Karl Pflock: namely, extracts from Newton’s personal diary from the 1970s. In the diary Newton revealed that, in the early 1950s, he was contacted by US military officials who wanted to speak with him about his crashed UFO story. Newton was told that the military knew that his UFO-crash-at-Aztec story was bogus. Incredibly, however, they wanted him to continue spreading the story far and wide, and to whoever would listen. Newton asserted in his diary that while he might not have known too much about crashed UFOs, he had no doubt that his mysterious contacts certainly did know a great deal about the subject. This raises a number of important questions:

Was Newton (as a convicted and known con man) asked to continue telling his largely discredited tale because it acted as a convenient smokescreen behind which the military could hide a real crashed UFO? Or is there another reason why the military would want to spread fake stories about the US Government being in possession of a crashed UFO?

Well, possibly. The US Intelligence community is known to have made use of the UFO controversy as a tool of psychological warfare in the 1950s. Is it conceivable that such stories were deliberately spread – at the height of the Cold War – to try and convince the Soviets that the US had access to a technology the like of which the Soviets could only dream of? Or is this yet another of Silas Newton’s grand games – a game designed to ensure that even from beyond the grave he continues to stir the Aztec cauldron?

Also, if there’s any lingering doubt in your mind as to any possible “truth” to any of these so-called crash retrieval stories (especially Roswell) I think Tim Printy makes an excellent (and often overlooked) point here…

What Did the Air Force Really Know?
http://members.aol.com/TPrinty/end.html

In 1953, Captain Edward Ruppelt, head of project Blue Book, gave a SECRET briefing to the Air Defense Command. In this briefing, Ruppelt stated,

However, there is no – and I want to emphasize and repeat the word no – evidence of this in any report the Air Force has received…WE HAVE NEVER PICKED UP ANY HARDWARE.’ (My emphasis) By that we mean any pieces, parts, whole articles, or anything that would indicate an unknown material or object. (Frazier, Karr, and Nickel 70)

Another SECRET briefing paper, dated August 15, states, "Finally, no debris or material evidence has ever been recovered following an unexplained sighting" (Frazier, Karr, and Nickel 70).

Or as Tim puts it in the form of a hypothetical classified (LOL) ad:

WANTED: One flying saucer in operable condition. No questions asked. Contact USAF.

Serpentime wrote:Dr. Robert Sarbacher (JRDB) allegedly confirmed (in 1984) that he had been the source of the exact information (in question) that the Canadian embassy had provided to Smith. He claimed to remember the inquiry clearly.

If I understand correctly, he also plainly attributed Vannevar Bush’s alleged involvement to a study of artifacts from “outer space”. From Sarbacher’s allusions (as I remember them), whatever he was discussing had nothing to do with either projects Grudge or Bluebook (which Captain Ruppelt didn’t re-name until 1951, correct?)

Right but as I’m sure you know one must be extremely careful when evaluating such extraordinary claims. They’re invariably (in my experience) worded to create the illusion of a forgone conclusion that most likely isn’t… much like a sleight of hand magic trick. Is it possible Bush (or somebody under him at the RDB) tasked somebody to secretly evaluate alleged ET artifacts in conjunction with (on behalf of?) an existing TS study (i.e. Project Sign/Grudge which later “became” Blue Book)? Possibly, but that doesn’t mean they found anything conclusive does it?

Serpentime wrote:Whatever motivated him to say such things, I am not sure of.

~ Perhaps he was demented? LOL

You may be right. I don’t know but in the absence of any independently verifiable information seems to me it’s merely his opinion based on things he claims to “know”. If I had to guess I’d say he was “preying” (for who knows what reason… I can think of a few) on the gullibility of “true believers” which Smith appears to be a classic case of…

Binding Forces
W.B. Smith
http://www.presidentialufo.com/binding_forces.htm

Some years ago, following some rather bad airplane crashes for which there was no satisfactory explanation, the people from “elsewhere” were asked through “contacts” if these crashes were possibly due to our crafts flying to close to their craft. We were informed that while very few of our craft had suffered in this manner, much greater care was now being exercised by the saucer pilots so that this cause was virtually eliminated. We were informed, however, that our pilots flew around in complete disregard of the regions of reduced binding with which this planet is afflicted, and very often their craft were not designed with sufficient factor and safety and came apart.

We are Not Alone
W. B. Smith
http://www.presidentialufo.com/not_alone.htm

The foregoing is not just idle speculation, since we have a great deal of evidence that something like this is actually happening. The Darwinian theory of evolution shows certain relationships between the various forms, which inhabit this planet, but there is very little evidence to indicate that they all evolved here. Maybe some of them did, but a more reasonable explanation is that they were brought here when the planet was in a suitable condition to receive them. Recent spectroscopic observations of the reflected light from Mars show the presence of vegetation, which synthesizes sugar, thus making it closely related to much terrestrial vegetation. Radio telescopes are picking up all sorts of radio noises from the sky, many of which are so systematic as to preclude natural origin. Peculiar markings, light flashes, and cloud and dust formations have been seen on Mars and our moon. And, most significant of all, the craft of these alien beings have been seen near, and on, this earth!

Yep, they’re here LOL.

Serpentime wrote:According to Doty’s official records, he was assigned as NCOIC of AFOSI Detachment 1406 on February 11, 1980. Previously, On May 20, 1979, he had been assigned to AFOSI Detachment 1700 as a Special Investigator and Counterintelligence Technician.

Ah, I see… i.e. a nobody like the rest of us. Thanks for clearing that up.

Serpentime wrote:Where others have been unable to perceive the English characters for the word “victims” in Ramey’s alleged tele-type, I have reluctantly been unable to come to any other conclusion, or substitution of English words or characters, that best fits the enhancements of the photo that I have studied.

Sorry to hear that LOL. Let’s say for the sake of argument that by some stretch of the imagination it does say “victims”… if so what makes you think it has anything to do with Roswell? Shouldn’t one systematically rule out all other possible events of concern to the Commander of the 8th AAF involving “victims” first before jumping to any conclusions?

Serpentime wrote:In all honesty, the potential implications of this “anomaly” are too important to dismiss completely (IMO) – if that interpretation could - indeed - be accurate (?)

Perhaps this paper (if you haven’t seen it already) might help you evaluate the situation?

“A Message in a Bottle:” Confounds in Deciphering the
Ramey Memo from the Roswell UFO Case

James Houran and Kevin D. Randle
http://www.scientificexploration.org/js ... randle.pdf

Abstract—Previous analyses of a photograph showing a document held by General Ramey from the Roswell UFO case reportedly revealed content that supported a crashed extraterrestrial craft scenario. Other investigators of this document suggested, however, that it was ambiguous stimuli being interpreted by pro-Roswell investigators in accordance with their expectations. To assess the possible extent of bias in these interpretations, we had three randomly assigned groups of participants attempt to decipher the document under different suggestion conditions: one condition in which we told participants (N = 59) they were looking at a document pertaining to the famous Roswell UFO case, a second condition in which we told participants (N = 58 ) that they were looking at a document pertaining to secret testing of the atomic bomb, and a final condition in which participants (N = 59) were told nothing about the possible content of the document. Many participants indeed claimed to be able to read the document, although their subsequent solutions appeared to follow directly from the experimental suggestions. Moreover, the number of words deciphered was related to participants’ ages, tolerance of ambiguity, and relative exposure to the UFO field and especially the Roswell case. However, a few words in the same locations in the document were consistently perceived across the three suggestion conditions and these matched the words identified in previous investigations. We conclude therefore that future research of Ramey memo might be potentially informative if certain methodological criteria are established. Such protocols are outlined.

An all too rare but refreshing attempt to apply science to the problem IMO.

Serpentime wrote:Personally, I’ve never been offended by a little “mystery” in the World.

And none of it has earned me a single penny… LOL

Unfortunately some people take this sh*t way too seriously and are incapable of separating fact from fiction on their own… see Paul Bennewitz and Heaven's Gate FMI… or even James McDonald for that matter.

Serpentime wrote:I’d be pleased to read your response to my musings, AD. In fact, I think it would be very helpful if you might “walk us through” the evidence behind your hypothesis (?).

I thought that was what I was doing LOL. I suppose I could try and put it all together into a single article but to be honest I’m not all that sure my interpretation is correct. Unfortunately I don’t have a whole lot to go on at this point.

Serpentime wrote:Skeptics that we are, I think that any additional facts and/or clarification that you could provide toward the alleged chain of events involving Dr. Crary’s culpability might be very helpful to us?

I’m afraid that which I’ve already outlined here in this thread scattered throughout my posts is pretty much all I have. Perhaps if/when Dr. Crary’s memoirs are published we will know more.

Serpentime wrote:For the moment – and I mean no disrespect to you, or your research, in any form whatsoever – I am still forced to agree with Toon.

As am I. The purpose of this thread was simply to get this potential NEW (or as my associate sees it “poorly publicized’) evidence out there and see if anybody might have something to add to my own attempts to reconcile it with “known” facts… wherever it leads.

Thanks again Sepentime for your thought-provoking and insightful comments. It has been a true pleasure!
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby ryguy » Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:43 pm

Skeptics that we are, I think that any additional facts and/or clarification that you could provide toward the alleged chain of events involving Dr. Crary’s culpability might be very helpful to us?


This is really the important issue here isn't it? Roswell and the surrounding witness testimonies and issues have been discussed and debated for quite some time. However if Dr. Crary's journals do provide additional intricate details of his activities at Roswell on and around those fateful days and weeks - and if the identities of the journalist(s) can be uncovered and linked to the reports that either generated or even only fed the news frenzy - it is at least an important fact to add to the record.

It would add to the plausibility of the story that Roswell really was what the declassified documents have explained - and people really did let their imaginations run away with them (wouldn't be the first time would it?)

That's not to say that it proves that's the case, but it's important enough to warrant pursuing and obtaining more information (if possible). Just as it would be important if it hinted the government's story was bunk. The important matter is to get to the heart of the truth on the issue, regardless of where that leads, right?

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby Zep Tepi » Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:44 pm

Some great information in this thread, I'd decided long ago based on the available evidence and data that the events at Roswell in 1947 were of terrestrial origin. This story was largely dead and forgotten until SF was contacted by Junior in 1978, since then the story has taken on a life of its own and is responsibile for so much that is wrong in the field of UFOlogy.

Nick Redfern was on the same Paracast interview that I did and was talking along the lines of there being 70+ instances of crashed UFO's over the years. I must say I was quite stunned to hear that. Haven't these aliens heard of the concept of qualtiy control?

Why would anyone - nevermind the USG - want to reverse engineer something that has a penchant for crashing at the first opportunity?!

It's akin to having a serious crash in your car every few weeks, at some point you would just give it up as a bad job and take the bus ;)

Cheers,
Zep
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:50 pm

Why would anyone - nevermind the USG - want to reverse engineer something that has a penchant for crashing at the first opportunity?!

(italics mine)

...unless those crashes were intentional- for purposes known only to ET. All the cards are on the table.

cs
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby ryguy » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:01 pm

cartoonsyndicate wrote:...unless those crashes were intentional- for purposes known only to ET. All the cards are on the table.

cs


Right - or ET is not as perfect, or as good, as they are given credit for. 70+ crashes in 60+ years ain't perfect...but it's a decent track record in terms of quality control....

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm

ryguy wrote:
cartoonsyndicate wrote:...unless those crashes were intentional- for purposes known only to ET. All the cards are on the table.

cs


Right - or ET is not as perfect, or as good, as they are given credit for. 70+ crashes in 60+ years ain't perfect...but it's a decent track record in terms of quality control....

-Ry


Relative to our state of existence- they are probably perfect. See Michio Kaku for an explanation. http://www.mkaku.org/

All 'crashes' are, then, for a purpose. To seed our technology? To blow our pathetic minds? To...?

Who can say? To me, it's sorta like throwing meat to a tiger in a zoo. But that theory, in itself, is self-absorptive. To understand these phenomena we need a new way of thinking. Are we capable?

My answer is 'yes.'
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby Zep Tepi » Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:35 am

Alternatively, maybe there haven't been any crashes in the first place....

Good link btw Toon.

Cheers,
Zep
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm

Postby Serpentime » Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:00 am

Access Denied wrote:Thanks again Sepentime for your thought-provoking and insightful comments. It has been a true pleasure!


Thanks, AD. :) The feeling is mutual.

My way, your way, or any other way – you’re an honest guy with a real desire to respect the Truth. And that’s something I always admire.

In my opinion, you’ve presented us with some interesting “new “ material in this thread, and I - personally - am glad to be aware of it. :)


Access Denied wrote:Also, as far as correlating July 5th with the date “the first press report hit the papers two days later” perhaps this is what is being referred to…

Portland Oregonian - July 6, 1947
Reports Come in From All Over Nation Telling of Sighting Mysterious Discs
http://www.project1947.com/fig/1947d.htm

And…

Portland Oregonian - July 6, 1947
'Flying Disc' Reports Come From Hundreds, in 28 States
Science Fails to Give Facts
Government Men Ask to See Sample


To be perfectly honest, this is where I had an interpretive “Ramey Memo” moment, if such an idiom makes sense?

While I can accept that a rural rancher like Mac Brazel might not have become aware of the national “flying saucer” excitement until July 5th (despite almost two weeks of widespread press coverage) and that this July 5th “flap” plausibly (?) accounts for the statement: ”The next day he first heard about the flying disks, and he wondered if what he had found might be the remains of one of these.”, I must admit that my first (interpretive?) reading of ”when the first press report hit the papers two days later…” made me think of something slightly different.


Upon reading the phrase: ” When the first press report hit the papers two days later, Dr Crary went to the Mogul security officer and apologized…”, my very first thought was that Crary was apologizing for the July 8th media frenzy (?).


Perhaps I was creating an unwarranted meaning that wasn’t proper?


While evidence clearly demonstrates (IMO) that a “wild public interest” - worthy of Crary’s apparently guilty conscience – did occur in New Mexico on July 8th, I (personally) was unaware of anything beyond the ongoing national press accounts that Crary could have realistically (IMO) felt himself to blame for?

In other words – and barring new information from the period Press – I don’t see why the National sightings reports from July 5th, or 6th, would have excited Crary to the point of apology when he was already joking about “flying saucers” on July 3rd?


Again, I may be totally confused here, but July 5th didn’t “feel” like the right date to me, based on the language that I was presented with (?).


As for the linkage of Dr. Crary to the RDR article based solely on his use of the term “flying saucer” (as opposed to flying “disk”), I find this direct connection questionable, in light of the fact that the national press articles had been widely (?) using that same term since June 24th, when reporter Bill Bequette allegedly coined it?

I could always be wrong, but it doesn’t seem unreasonable to me that RDR could have selected the term “flying saucer” from a variety of then public (?) sources other than Dr. Crary, or a single propitiously-placed reporter (?).


While this speculation does not – of course - rule Dr. Crary out as a (partial?) source for the story, the suggested linkage seems questionable (IMHO), and I’m not sure that the statement:

”And no, I don't mean "Mogul". That is what the Balloons were, but that's not why the UFO craze started there.”

is factually – or properly – justified, considering the (present?) lack of a tangible chain of evidence to support such a novel hypothesis.


Should more data become available at a future time, then I would be more than pleased to examine it, and to reconsider my present views - as necessary - should the pertinent evidence so suggest. :)


Though I muse here only, perhaps Dr. Crary was (later) amused at his strange sense of “precognition”, and jokingly implied a larger part for himself in history (in his letters, memoirs, or conversations?) than formal history itself might recognize?


As people are sometimes known to say (coincidence or not):

“It makes for a good story, doesn’t it?”


;)


Access Denied wrote:I think it’s more likely that Lt. Haut simply blew it.


Personally– if the NYU / Mogul #4 scenario really is correct – my guess would be that Marcel blew it. This interpretation may also be substantiated through Colonel Blanchard’s later evaluation of Marcel as a “magnifier” of problems (?).


In that case, I might think of it all something like this:


~ Brazel learns about the “flying disks” on July 5th and shows his unidentified debris to others, who – in turn – reinforce his supposition and suggest that he claim to have recovered a “flying disk” so that he might collect the posted reward.

~ Next, Brazel “follows the money” to Sheriff Wilcox’s office, where he hints that he has found one of the mysterious “flying disks” (that everyone is speculating about, but still cannot understand the physical nature of).

~ Intrigued by Brazel’s claim, Wilcox calls Major Marcel at RAAF and informs him that a rancher may have located a crashed “flying disk” in the northwest countryside. Equally intrigued, Marcel then sets out for the Foster ranch in search of a “flying saucer”, where – coincidentally (?) – he finds exactly what he (and Brazel) intends to find: The remains of a “Flying Saucer”.

~ So excited is Marcel at his “disc-overy”, that he even returns to his own home, that night, to demonstrate the “wreckage” to his family.

~ Colonel Blanchard is unable to make better sense of Marcel’s analysis. As such, he notifies his superior officers in Washington of the find – to which General Clements McMullen requests a direct flight of Brazel’s “sample” to Washington via Colonel courier.

~ Lt. Haut – at Blanchard’s directive, or not – issues a press release based on Marcel’s analysis. Public curiosity increases accordingly on Tuesday, July 8th 1947.

~ Meanwhile, Sheridan Cavitt has reported the “disc-overy” separately to Washington through confidential CIC channels. When CIC and AAF Headquarters complete their own analysis, they (perhaps?) come to the conclusion that Alamogordo and Top Secret Project Mogul (or other such classified testing) may be to blame for the unknown “wreckage” that RAAF has stumbled onto (?).

~ Now understanding the (likely?) true nature of the rancher’s “find”, McMullen next calls Colonel DuBose at FWAAF and instructs him that General Ramey is to “dummy up” and create a cover story for the “disc-overy”. Additionally, McMullen tells DuBose that ‘all of this is beyond Top Secret and you are never to discuss this again’, which Colonel DuBose does not – until he is an old man.

~ The “Weather Balloon” explanation / cover-story is given to the press.

~ General Ramey makes an evening radio appearance and states that the entire fuss is nothing more than the result of innocent mistakes made by the Officers at RAAF.


Access Denied wrote:Based on my own review of the evidence I agree with Moore’s assessment that #4 was most likely the source of the debris Brazel found on his ranch. If it wasn’t I’ve yet to see a more credible explanation. Ockham's razor and all of that good stuff…


~ If NYU Flight #4 is the answer to the “Roswell Incident”, then how close does my above “shave” come to Occam’s Razor?;)

LOL


Access Denied wrote:…Personally I think Brazel’s story is the only one that’s substantiated since it was the only one I’m aware of that was documented at the time it happened. Any story that deviates from that mundane scenario should immediately be suspect… if there was anything to it why did it take 30 years to surface?


~ But seeing as this story has served as the centerpiece for a number of assumptions, I would like to raise one additional issue / question regarding Brazel’s “mundane” account of the circumstances.


As I was re-reading the full article as excerpted in my copy of The Roswell Report: Case Closed, I noticed that the story also credited Brazel with this interesting description:

Brazel did not see it fall from the sky and did not see it before it was torn up, so he did not know the size or shape that it might have been, but he thought it might have been as large as a tabletop. The balloon which held it up, if that was how it worked, must have been about 12 feet long, he felt, measuring the distance by the size of the room in which he sat. The rubber was smoky gray in color and scattered over an area about 200 yards in diameter.

When the debris was gathered up the tinfoil, paper, tape, and sticks made a bundle about three feet long and 7 or 8 inches thick, while the rubber made a bundle about 18 or 20 inches long and about 8 inches thick. In all, he estimated, the entire lot would have weighed maybe five pounds.


{Emphasis added.}


In a curious juxtaposition, however, Captain McAndrew also includes a full diagram of “TRAIN FOR CLUSTER FLIGHT NO. 2” on the previous page – and represents it as “similar to one found on a ranch 75 miles northwest of Roswell, N.M. in June 1947…”, thereby clearly comparing it to Flight #4.


Unfortunately, however, “TRAIN FOR CLUSTER FLIGHT NO. 2” is over 200 feet long, contains 20 350 gram balloons, two 1000 gram balloons, three large (tin foil) box-reflectors, four parachutes, one radiosonde, a payload, and a heavy ballast.


Question:

If Brazel really did locate NYU / Mogul #4 on the Foster ranch, then how could he have accurately described all of that equipment as constituting two hand-carried bundles that weighed “maybe five pounds"?



Perhaps I’m crazy, but am I the only reader who senses a strange sense of “contradiction” here?

And if this statement is inaccurate for some reason, then what can we make of the rest of this article and its representations?



~ Just for fun, Brazel also goes on to (allegedly) say this:

I am sure that what I found was not any weather observation balloon.


Yet his description of the “debris” (IMO) sounds EXACTLY like just that – a weather balloon; which he further states that he has previously recovered TWO of with little or no outstanding confusion…



Help me AD!!

Simple fool that I am, I think I’m getting confused… :shock: LOL



Best,

Serpentime
"Life's fantasy... To be locked away, and still to think you're free."

-- Ronnie Dio
User avatar
Serpentime
Valued Contributor
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 6:38 pm
Location: The Tree of Knowledge

Postby Access Denied » Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:08 am

Serpentime wrote:Thanks, AD. The feeling is mutual.

My way, your way, or any other way – you’re an honest guy with a real desire to respect the Truth. And that’s something I always admire.

In my opinion, you’ve presented us with some interesting “new “ material in this thread, and I - personally - am glad to be aware of it.

Thank you and you’re welcome. I believe Truth is self evident… but the PR department sucks.

Serpentime wrote:While I can accept that a rural rancher like Mac Brazel might not have become aware of the national “flying saucer” excitement until July 5th (despite almost two weeks of widespread press coverage) and that this July 5th “flap” plausibly (?) accounts for the statement: ”The next day he first heard about the flying disks, and he wondered if what he had found might be the remains of one of these.”,

I believe I read somewhere he didn’t have electricity on the ranch so I imagine his awareness of current events depended on word of mouth and how often he went into town.

Serpentime wrote:Upon reading the phrase: ” When the first press report hit the papers two days later, Dr Crary went to the Mogul security officer and apologized…”, my very first thought was that Crary was apologizing for the July 8th media frenzy (?).

That’s what I thought too but I couldn’t conclusively place Dr. Crary in the field on a recovery on July 6th based on the available evidence which is what led me to consider a less obvious interpretation which so far has panned out surprisingly well.

Serpentime wrote:Perhaps I was creating an unwarranted meaning that wasn’t proper?

Or maybe I was just seeing if anybody was paying attention? ;)

Serpentime wrote:While evidence clearly demonstrates (IMO) that a “wild public interest” - worthy of Crary’s apparently guilty conscience – did occur in New Mexico on July 8th, I (personally) was unaware of anything beyond the ongoing national press accounts that Crary could have realistically (IMO) felt himself to blame for?

In other words – and barring new information from the period Press – I don’t see why the National sightings reports from July 5th, or 6th, would have excited Crary to the point of apology when he was already joking about “flying saucers” on July 3rd?

Again, I may be totally confused here, but July 5th didn’t “feel” like the right date to me, based on the language that I was presented with (?).

I was beginning to think the same thing until I found the following news report on the Albuquerque Journal web site. It appears a (unnamed) reporter went on a little fishing trip by citing an anonymous source…

Atomic Energy Experiments
Explain 'Flying Saucers'
Says Scientist; More in Sky

From the Journal Archives
Sunday Morning, July 6, 1947
By International News Service
http://www.abqjournal.com/roswell/rjpage1.htm

[emphasis added]

The magic words "atomic energy" were offered tonight as the explanation of the baffling "flying saucers" which have been sighted in increasing numbers by hundreds of persons in 32 states, but mainly in the western United States for the past week.

A noted scientist at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena said flatly the objects skimming throughout the skies are the results of Government experiments in "transmutation of atomic energy."

This was the first unqualified explanation of the "discs."

The California Institute of Technology later issued a denial that one of its scientists had suggested the saucers might be experiments in "transmutation of atomic energy." Dr. C.C. Lauritsen, head of the school's nuclear physics departments, said he believed the discs have nothing to do with nuclear physics.

Denies Statement
Officials of the Atomic Energy Commission in Washington said it had no experiments involving "flying saucers" under way, and one of them added, "All we know is what we read in the papers."

An Army Air Forces official in Washing said the AAF was completely mystified by the saucer reports.

Capt. Tom Brown, AAF information officer, said, "This is definitely not an air forces experiment. We absolutely do not know what these flying discs are. In fact, we wish we did, but we're just as mystified as everyone else."

Maj. Richard Shoop, chief technical engineer at Muroc Army Air Base, denied the discs were connected with any experiments there. Muroc officers said, moreover, a P-80 jet fighter we being readied to give chase if any of the saucers showed up around the desert proving ground.

No Navy Gadgets
The Navy also declared "no such gadgets" were being tested at either the guided-missile test station at Point Gugu or at the Inyokern ordnance test station in the Mojave desert.

Col. Al Dutton, commanding officer of the Oregon National Guard, announced Saturday night that the guard's squadron would attempt to photograph any future apparitions of the discs. He said six P-51 fighter planes, equipped with gun and telescopic cameras, would be kept ready to take off on a moment's notice.

Dr. Harold Urey, atom scientist at the University of Chicago, called that "gibberish."

A spokesman at the Hanford atomic works in southern Washington disclaimed any knowledge of the suggested relation of the "saucers" to atomic experiments. The spokesman said "So far as we know, they have no connection with our work here.”

More Are Seen
New reports of the strange objects continued to pour in as the public weighed the words of the Pasedena scientists would not allow use of his name.

A disc was sighted this morning in Seattle. Another was reported by an Army Air Forces sergeant at Mountain View near San Francisco bay. Others were reported in various parts of the nation.

At Columbus, Ohio, Louis E Starr, national commander-in-chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, asserted at a VFW convention that he was expecting information from Washington about "the fleets of flying saucers." "Too little is being told to the people of this country," Starr declared.

Two Chicago astronomers said the discs are probably "man-made and radio-controlled." The undulating flashing objects "couldn't be meteors," said Dr. Girard Kluper, director of the University of Chicago's Yerkes Observatory at Williams Bay, Wis.

Discs Man Made
Support for the Pasadena scientist’s statement came from several quarters. It appeared that the discs were definitely "man-made" and not "space ships" from another planet.

At the Army Air Forces' McClellan Field in Northern California, authorities suggested that top Army officials may know the nature and origin of the discs.

They hinted that "if they actually do exist, they might be a part of a U.S. Army training process and coming somewhere from the south."


One official said: "It's nothing for people to fear, get stirred up or excited about."

Recall Swedish Reports
Some thought the situation similar to that in Sweden last year, when mystery missiles were reported over that country, and Dr. A.A. Knowlton, Reed College physics professor in Portland, Ore., commented:

"There's a great possibility that the flying visitors are the result of secret experiments with the guided missiles, either by our own or foreign governments. Some months ago there were many reports of mysterious rockets over Sweden. Stories about these were never confirmed or officially explained."

The reports from Sweden, however, were of objects trailing flames, like a rocket or jet-propelled missile. The reports on the discs almost universally mention that no means of propulsion can be seen.

Offers Suggestion
And from Los Angeles came word that the idea of airborne "saucers" is not new. Leo Bentz, once noted building of racing autos, said he witnessed a demonstration of a saucer-like flying model back in 1928 in the Southern California city.

Bentz said the inventor of the strange little craft was a Frenchman, George de Bay, who has since dropped out of sight.

Bentz said he lost track of his friend but the Frenchman said he might go to Europe and intimated that he was headed for Russia.

A Coast Guard yeoman in Seattle displayed what he said was a picture of a disc. It showed a patch of light on a dark sky. The photo was snapped by Yeoman Frank Ryman near Seattle last night.

Tells of Experiment
The noted Pasedena scientist- veteran of the Manhattan project which produced the atomic bomb - was the only authority to claim flatly that the "flying saucers" were no mystery to him.

He said experiments are being conducted at Muroc Lake in Southern California, at White Sands in New Mexico, at Portland Ore., and in other places. He did not mention Hanford, Washington.

The scientist declared:

"These 'saucers' so-called, are capable of high speeds, but they can be controlled from the round.”

"They are twenty feet in width in the center and are partially rocket-propelled on the take-off."

He added:

"People are not 'seeing things.'"

"Such flying discs actually are in experimental existence."

The scientist said any further information on the discs would have to come from the War Department.

[snip]

Note the above report is dated July 6th but the following rebuttal is dated July 5th …

Lilienthal Denies Knowing of Discs
Says Not Connected With Atom Research

DENVER, July 5 (AP) - David Lilienthal, chairman of the atomic Energy Commission, told the Denver Post in a telephone interview tonight that the flying saucers reported throughout the nation were in no way connected with atomic experiments.

The Post said a reporter held this short phone conversation with Lilenthal, in Washington:

The reporter explained the purpose of his call and related reports that a west coast scientist had said the discs were related to "transmutation of atomic energy."

Lilienthal interrupted to say "of course, I can't prevent anyone from saying foolish things."

The Post reporter asked, "Can you shed any light on the matter at all?"

Lilienthal replied, "No."

"Is it in any way connected with experiments in atomic energy, the transmutation of metals or similar research?" the reporter asked.

"No," said Lilienthal, who then added in closing the conversation "until someone has the facts about this phenomenon, I can't see how anyone can say anything definite about it."

Sounds like a lot of unfounded speculation to me. Could this be the work of the reporter who overhead Dr. Crary in the diner who was “new, hungry, impressionable, and knew nothing about science but read pulp science fiction a lot”?

Serpentime wrote:As for the linkage of Dr. Crary to the RDR article based solely on his use of the term “flying saucer” (as opposed to flying “disk”), I find this direct connection questionable, in light of the fact that the national press articles had been widely (?) using that same term since June 24th, when reporter Bill Bequette allegedly coined it?

I could always be wrong, but it doesn’t seem unreasonable to me that RDR could have selected the term “flying saucer” from a variety of then public (?) sources other than Dr. Crary, or a single propitiously-placed reporter (?).

Right but again, I think the implication here is that Dr. Crary was inadvertently responsible for Kenneth Arnold’s “flying saucers” being equated with the military in the eyes of the press and that this may have influenced Lt. Haut to “play up” his “press release” about the recovery of a “flying disc”. As a press officer it stands to reason he was aware of what was going out over the AP wire don’t you think?

Serpentime wrote:While this speculation does not – of course - rule Dr. Crary out as a (partial?) source for the story, the suggested linkage seems questionable (IMHO), and I’m not sure that the statement:

”And no, I don't mean "Mogul". That is what the Balloons were, but that's not why the UFO craze started there.”

is factually – or properly – justified, considering the (present?) lack of a tangible chain of evidence to support such a novel hypothesis.

Should more data become available at a future time, then I would be more than pleased to examine it, and to reconsider my present views - as necessary - should the pertinent evidence so suggest.

See above and in the meantime I’m working on obtaining more data.

Serpentime wrote:Though I muse here only, perhaps Dr. Crary was (later) amused at his strange sense of “precognition”, and jokingly implied a larger part for himself in history (in his letters, memoirs, or conversations?) than formal history itself might recognize?

As people are sometimes known to say (coincidence or not):

“It makes for a good story, doesn’t it?”

Well, I don’t have any reason to doubt the veracity the information or the integrity of my source but that’s just me so I certainly understand the skepticism. I think many researchers though (including myself) have underestimated Dr. Crary’s importance in deciphering what really happened. The following in the AF report illustrates this point I think…

THE REAL COVER STORY

On July 10, 1947, a newspaper article appeared in the Alamogordo Daily News displaying for the press the devices, neoprene balloons, and corner reflectors which had been misidentified as the "flying disc" two days earlier at Roswell AAF (Atch 11). The photographs and accompanying article quoted Maj Wilbur D. Pritchard, a Watson Laboratory Project Officer (not assigned to MOGUL) stationed at Alamogordo AAF. This article appeared to have been an attempt to deflect attention from the Top Secret MOGUL project by publicly displaying a portion of the equipment and offering misleading information. If there was a "cover story" involved in this incident, it is this article, not the actions or statements of Ramey.

The article in the Alamogordo Daily News stated that the balloons and radar targets had been used for the last fifteen months for the training of long-range radar personnel and the gathering of meteorological data. The article lists four officers -- Maj W.D. Pritchard, Lieut S.W. Seigel, Capt L.H. Dyvad, and Maj C.W. Mangum -- as being involved with the balloon project, which was false. Moore and Trakowski could not recall any of the officers in the photograph, with the exception of Dyvad, whom Moore identified as a pilot who coordinated radar activities. (43) Additionally, some of the details discussed (balloon sighting in Colorado, tracking by B-17s, recovery of equipment, launching balloons at 54 AM, and balloon altitudes of 30,000-40,000 feet) relate directly to the NYU balloon project, indicating that the four officers had detailed knowledge of MOGUL. (44) Moore's unorthodox technique of employing several balloons and several radar targets was shown in one of the photographs. Other techniques unique to Moore including the boiling of balloons before launch (which he personally developed during World War II) and a stepladder used to launch balloons, could not all have coincidentally been used by other organizations. (45)

The details may have been provided to the radar officers by Crary, Project MOGUL Field Operations Director, who did not depart by C-54 with the rest of the NYU/Watson Laboratory group on July 8, but who later left by car on July 9, the day the staged launch took place. Additionally, three of Crary's staff, Don Reynolds, Sol Oliva, and Bill Edmonston, resided permanently in Alamogordo. It was apparent from Crary's diary that he had worked very closely with Major Pritchard and reported to him on occasion (twelve documented meetings from December 1946-April 1947). One instance, on April 7, 1947, Crary gave Pritchard a "progress report for MOGUL project to date," indicating that Major Pritchard had access to MOGUL information. (46) Another statement which appeared to confirm a cover story appeared in the caption below the balloon picture and described a typewritten tag stapled to the target identifying it as having come from Alamogordo AAF. Moore believed this not to be true because any equipment found was not to be associated with the USAAF, only with NYU; therefore flights carried "return to" tags identifying NYU as the responsible agency. (47)

This would seem to confirm the statement that “Shortly afterwards, everyone decided that it was creating a new wild public interest which was likely to actually accidentally uncover what Mogul really was all about, and they started trying to play it down.”

Serpentime wrote:Personally– if the NYU / Mogul #4 scenario really is correct – my guess would be that Marcel blew it. This interpretation may also be substantiated through Colonel Blanchard’s later evaluation of Marcel as a “magnifier” of problems (?).

I find it hard to believe that Marcel could have mistaken the debris for anything other than it what it was (Cavitt who was with him certainly didn’t) and I don’t see where a mistake was made unless he somehow influenced (or negligently allowed) Lt. Haut to “play up” press release.

Serpentime wrote:In that case, I might think of it all something like this:

~ Brazel learns about the “flying disks” on July 5th and shows his unidentified debris to others, who – in turn – reinforce his supposition and suggest that he claim to have recovered a “flying disk” so that he might collect the posted reward.

I suppose that’s possible but if you’re basing that on this I’m not sure I buy it…

Loretta Proctor, 82
http://www.abqjournal.com/roswell/roslived1.htm

Loretta and Floyd Proctor raised sheep and cattle on a ranch southeast of Corona in 1947. Their nearest neighbor was W.W. "Mac" Brazel, a leaseholder on the Foster ranch, about six miles away.

"I don't remember just exactly what day it was but it was just before the Fourth of July and Mac Brazel came by our house and he had a small fragment of this material he showed us. He wanted us to go down and look at what he had found. Back then, it was just after the war and you didn't have tires and you didn't have very good vehicles or gasoline and there was no roads out there. We didn't try to go."

"We told him it was possibly a UFO. Back then, people were seeing a lot of things and reporting them. There were a lot of things up in the air. We called them flying saucers back then. We heard there was possibly rewards out for a UFO if anybody found one, so he went to Roswell and reported it. They kept him down there I guess right close to a week.”

"What he brought up and showed to us was like a lightweight wood. ... It was six or seven inches long and a little bigger around than a pencil. He and my husband, they tried to cut on it and they tried to burn it and it didn't make any mark or anything. It was different from anything we had ever seen.”

Her story contradicts a number of others not the least of which is Brazel’s who said this…

Roswell Daily Record - July 9, 1947
Gen. Ramey Empties Roswell Saucer
Ramey Says Excitement is Not Justified
General Ramey Says Disk is Weather Balloon

[snip]

The weather balloon was found several days ago near the center of New Mexico by Rancher W. W. Brazel. He said he didn't think much about it until he went into Corona, N. M., last Saturday and heard the flying disk reports.

He returned to his ranch, 85 miles northwest of Roswell, and recovered the wreckage of the balloon, which he had placed under some brush.

Then Brazel hurried back to Roswell, where he reported his find to the sheriff's office.

Note as previously mentioned he said in the July 9th “Harassed Rancher” RDR article that his wife and daughter Bessy helped him gather up the debris on July 4th. Considering Loretta Proctor’s claim that Brazel and her husband discovered the material had some “unusual” properties I would have to say that Brazel’s account at the time is more credible.

Serpentime wrote:~ Next, Brazel “follows the money” to Sheriff Wilcox’s office, where he hints that he has found one of the mysterious “flying disks” (that everyone is speculating about, but still cannot understand the physical nature of).

~ Intrigued by Brazel’s claim, Wilcox calls Major Marcel at RAAF and informs him that a rancher may have located a crashed “flying disk” in the northwest countryside. Equally intrigued, Marcel then sets out for the Foster ranch in search of a “flying saucer”, where – coincidentally (?) – he finds exactly what he (and Brazel) intends to find: The remains of a “Flying Saucer”.

~ So excited is Marcel at his “disc-overy”, that he even returns to his own home, that night, to demonstrate the “wreckage” to his family.

Purely conjecture on my part but I’ve often wondered if Marcel merely played up the story for Jr. who innocently believed it and if that had something to do with Sr.’s version of story that came out 30 years later.

Serpentime wrote:~ Colonel Blanchard is unable to make better sense of Marcel’s analysis. As such, he notifies his superior officers in Washington of the find – to which General Clements McMullen requests a direct flight of Brazel’s “sample” to Washington via Colonel courier.

Not likely as discussed in more detail below. Blanchard went on leave on the 7th and it is unclear what if anything was discussed with him regarding the incident at his regularly scheduled morning staff meeting. Note that in the AF Report it says this in the caption under McMullen’s picture…

Maj. Gen. Clements McMullen, Deputy Chief of Staff, Strategic Air Command, 1947. General McMullen is alleged to have directed General Ramey to cover up the recovery of an extraterrestrial craft and crew. After an extensive search, the “Command Correspondence” file for the period was located. This file contained privileged and classified information of the highest order between McMullen and Ramey-it contained no information to support the outrageous claim.


Serpentime wrote:~ Lt. Haut – at Blanchard’s directive, or not – issues a press release based on Marcel’s analysis. Public curiosity increases accordingly on Tuesday, July 8th 1947.

~ Meanwhile, Sheridan Cavitt has reported the “disc-overy” separately to Washington through confidential CIC channels. When CIC and AAF Headquarters complete their own analysis, they (perhaps?) come to the conclusion that Alamogordo and Top Secret Project Mogul (or other such classified testing) may be to blame for the unknown “wreckage” that RAAF has stumbled onto (?).

According to his interview in the AF report Cavitt didn’t write a report on the incident. In fact he said it was possible he told Rickett to not mention it to anyone or report it to higher headquarters because they had wasted their time recovering a weather balloon which of course was later touted as “evidence” of a cover up.

Serpentime wrote:~ Now understanding the (likely?) true nature of the rancher’s “find”, McMullen next calls Colonel DuBose at FWAAF and instructs him that General Ramey is to “dummy up” and create a cover story for the “disc-overy”. Additionally, McMullen tells DuBose that ‘all of this is beyond Top Secret and you are never to discuss this again’, which Colonel DuBose does not – until he is an old man.

And even then only under hypnosis which it makes it highly suspect…

COL. DUBOSE'S MEMORIES
http://roswellfiles.com/Witnesses/ColDubose.htm

We have been hearing for some time that Gen. (then Col.) DuBose has stated that there was a cover-up and that the debris was swapped. This sounds damning!

However....

Schmitt and Friedman went to interview DuBose in Aug 1990 when DuBose was almost 90 years of age. They used regressive hypnosis on him to try to "help" his 43 year old memories.

"If the hypnotist has beliefs about what actually occurred, it is exceedingly difficult for him to prevent himself from inadvertently guiding the subject's recall so that he (the subject) will eventually "remember" what he, the hypnotist, believes actually happened."
THE USE AND MISUSE OF HYPNOSIS IN COURT. Doctor Martin Orne, past president of the International Society of Experimental Hypnosis, published in the International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis.

Apparently Schmitt and Friedman didn't show the photos of the debris to DuBose when they interviewed him. Schmitt indicated that they asked DuBose if he had ever seen the real Roswell debris, and he answered with "a resounding NO!!!" Was the debris on Ramey's floor the debris from Roswell? DuBose answered "No."

But when Shandera interviewed DuBose, both by phone and in person, DuBose looked at the photos and stated that they were the debris that Marcel had brought with him from Roswell!

Remember, according to crash proponents, Marcel was supposed to have brought with him the "real" debris, and Ramey's office had then substituted the balloon debris for the press.

But if, as some have suggested, the balloon had been substituted for the "real" debris, no one has yet answered where Ramey got an ML-307 and rubber from a weather balloon that had been out in the sun for three weeks!

* They weren't using ML-307s at FWAAF. They weren't using ML-307s at RAAF.

* Brig. Gen. Donald Yates in a UP article dated July 8, 1947 stated that only a few of the targets "are used daily, at points where some specific project requires highly accurate wind information from extreme altitudes."

* Warrant Officer Irving Newton recognized them from the Battle of Okinawa where they were used for gun laying- not from his experiences as a weatherman, since they were rarely used.

So if they were so rare and not in use in Ft. Worth and Roswell, where did "they" find parts of one that had been out in the sun for three weeks to substitute for the "real" debris?

And the answer of course is it was the debris from Roswell and from there apparently at least some of it (what wasn’t shown to the press) was sent to WF…

THE “COVER STORY”

From research, it appears that the wreckage displayed on July 8 consisted of unclassified components of a MOGUL balloon assembly. Possibly withheld, if it was indeed recovered, was the AN/CRT-l Sonabuoy, which could have compromised Project MOGUL. Although the Sonabuoy was not itself classified, its association with a balloon would have exposed a specific military purpose, an obvious violation of project classification guidelines (Atch 9). A device described in “crashed disc” publications as “a giant thermos jug” was allegedly transported from Fort Worth AAF to Wright Field. 38 This description is consistent with the appearance of an AN/CRT-l Sonabuoy such as was used on flight no. 4 (Atch 4). At some point General Ramey decided to forward the material to Wright Field, home of AMC, the appropriate agency to identify one of its own research devices or a device of unknown origin. If the debris was determined to be from an unknown source, the AMC, T-2, Intelligence or Analysis Division, would conduct scientific and/or intelligence analysis in an attempt to discover its origin. But since the balloons, reflectors, and Sonabuoy were from an AMC research project, the debris was forwarded to the appropriate division or subdivision, in this case the Electronics Subdivision of the Engineering Division. There, it was identified by Colonel Duffy, under whose purview Project MOGUL operated. Colonel Duffy, a former project officer of MOGUL with specific directions to “continue to monitor upper air programs,” was the appropriate headquarters officer to make an identification, which he apparently did. According to Captain (now Colonel) Trakowski, the officer who succeeded Colonel Duffy as project officer on MOGUL, after returning from the Alamogordo II field trip, Colonel Duffy contacted him by phone at Watson Laboratories and informed him that the “stuff you’ve been launching at Alamogordo,” had been sent to him for identification. He described the debris to Captain Trakowski, and Trakowski agreed that it was part of his project (MOGUL).

Another occurrence sometimes said to “prove” that General Ramey was part of a cover story is that portions of the debris were flown to Andrews AAF, MD. Andrews would have been a probable location to send the debris since it had Components of weather observation equipment. Andrews AAF was headquarters of the Army Air Forces Weather Service. It is also interesting to note that the commanding general of the Weather Service, Brig Gen Donald N. Yates, was quoted in wire service newspaper articles on July 9, providing his opinion of the incident. Additionally, in 1949, General Yates received a full briefing of the projects, including constant-level balloons, that made up Project MOGUL. While crashed disc proponents claim that General Ramey ordered a “colonel courier” to transport portions of the debris in a briefcase handcuffed to his wrist for the inspection of his superior, Maj Gen Clement McMullen, Deputy Commander of Strategic Air Command, it is more likely that any forwarding of such debris was another attempt to identify the research agency to which it belonged. If it did go to General McMullen, it would not have been difficult for him to have obtained the opinion of the Weather Service, since SAC and the Weather Service were located in the same building (no. 1535) at Andrews AAF.

No doubt this is how the rumors about “Hanger 18” at Wright-Patterson got started.

Serpentime wrote:~ The “Weather Balloon” explanation / cover-story is given to the press.

~ General Ramey makes an evening radio appearance and states that the entire fuss is nothing more than the result of innocent mistakes made by the Officers at RAAF.

~ If NYU Flight #4 is the answer to the “Roswell Incident”, then how close does my above “shave” come to Occam’s Razor?

It makes for a good story, doesn’t it? :)

Serpentime wrote:If Brazel really did locate NYU / Mogul #4 on the Foster ranch, then how could he have accurately described all of that equipment as constituting two hand-carried bundles that weighed “maybe five pounds"?

Right but who said he gathered up all the debris or found the entire balloon train for that matter? In fact Cavitt says in his interview in the AF report that even they didn’t pick up all the all debris that was (still scattered) out there. Also, if you’ll note on the drawing there were three cutoffs for separating 1) the top of the train 2) the balloons and 3) the ballast at preset altitudes. It sounds to me like the two bundles he described was one consisting of whatever remnants of the RAWIN target(s) he gathered up and the other was the rubber remnants of the balloon(s).

Serpentime wrote:Perhaps I’m crazy, but am I the only reader who senses a strange sense of “contradiction” here?

And if this statement is inaccurate for some reason, then what can we make of the rest of this article and its representations?

I think maybe what’s missing and causing you some confusion is apparently the sonobuoy (and “black box”?) are not part of that description. Perhaps this is because he didn’t find it or (allow me to speculate) it’s by design… i.e. omitted because of it’s sensitive nature in relation to Project MOGUL. Note that in the first RDR report the “flying disc” is described as an “instrument” and in this later one Brazel calls it a “weather meter”…

The Wyoming Eagle - July 9, 1947
ONLY MEAGER DETAILS OF FLYING DISC GIVEN
Kite-Like Device Found in N.M.; Studied by Army
http://www.project1947.com/fig/1947f.htm

Sheriff George Wilcox of Roswell said the disc was found about three weeks ago by W.W. Brizell (sic), on the Foster ranch at Corona, 75 miles northwest of Roswell.

Wilcox said that Brizell does not have a telephone and so did not report finding the disc until the day before yesterday. Brizell told the sheriff he didn't know just what the disc was, but that at first it appeared to be a weather meter.

The sheriff's office notified the army, which sent intelligence officers to pick up the object. Then today the army announced possession of a disc.

The sheriff quoted Brizell as saying the object "seemed more or less like tinfoil." The rancher described the disc as about as large as a safe in the sheriff's office.

The safe is about three and one-half by four feet.

Sounds to me like he’s describing a RAWIN target.

Serpentime wrote:~ Just for fun, Brazel also goes on to (allegedly) say this:

I am sure that what I found was not any weather observation balloon.


Yet his description of the “debris” (IMO) sounds EXACTLY like just that – a weather balloon; which he further states that he has previously recovered TWO of with little or no outstanding confusion…

Help me AD!!

Simple fool that I am, I think I’m getting confused… LOL

Welcome to the club.

It’s simple… weather balloons used in the area didn’t carry RAWIN targets or a AN/CRT-1 Sonabuoy.

Glad I could help. :)

P.S. I anticipate that this will be my last post on this subject here. This is getting to be too much like work LOL.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby lost_shaman » Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:33 am

Access Denied : I think the implication here is that Dr. Crary was inadvertently responsible for Kenneth Arnold’s “flying saucers” being equated with the military in the eyes of the press

AD,

There is no way that can be true. In fact Brig. Gen. Roger Ramey himself responded to Kenneth Arnold's Sighting assuring Americans that Martians were not attacking! Clearly Dr. Crary was not involved in Brig. Gen. Roger Ramey's first response to Ken Arnold's Sighting.

Also I think I was able to show that several RAWIN targets made the papers in very close proximity to Wright/Patterson between July 5th - July 8th.
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

Postby Serpentime » Tue Mar 06, 2007 4:16 am

Access Denied wrote:P.S. I anticipate that this will be my last post on this subject here. This is getting to be too much like work LOL.

LOL

Aw heck - Whoever said that Peer Review was any FUN must have lied… ;)

Nevertheless, I’m glad to have heard your ideas out, and your detailed posts in this thread have certainly given me some new perspectives to consider.

Though I’m sure that both of us could continue this exchange for a little while longer, the ideas that you have presented already have given me an enjoyable mental “work-out” all by themselves.


If the reverse is true, then so much the better. ;)


I’m glad to have helped, too. :)



Best,

Serpentime



lost_shaman wrote:Also I think I was able to show that several RAWIN targets made the papers in very close proximity to Wright/Patterson between July 5th - July 8th.


Welcome, Lost_Shaman. I remember you from ATS. :)


Circleville, Ohio springs to mind (?). Didn’t a local farmer report a weather balloon to the Sheriff as a possible explanation for the “flying discs”?

I don’t remember whether the press article was published on July 6th, or July 7th, but didn’t it include a picture of the farmer’s daughter holding up the aluminum reflector?


A connection between balloons and “flying discs” was clearly (?) in the public sphere before the RDR article on July 8th, although I don’t factually know if anyone assumed this to be a MILITARY balloon?


~ Then again, NO ONE was really agreed - in those early weeks - as to what a “flying disc” might actually constitute, if I recall the majority of the press articles properly (?).

There were reports of “flying spoons”, “flying lampshades”, and unknown aerial objects of many different appearances, descriptions, and “catch-words”…


“Little Green Men from Mars” were also considered as a possibility – but seemingly by a statistical minority, only (?).



Whatever a “flying disc” was, the main idea on the Country’s mind during that summer appeared to focus on – first – locating, and then “turning one in”, perhaps?


~ “Little Green Men (who weren’t green?)”, Project Mogul, or just another balloon, Mac Brazel seemed to have caught-on all by himself. :)



{And - possibly - other people in New Mexico, also... ;)}



Best,

Serpentime
"Life's fantasy... To be locked away, and still to think you're free."

-- Ronnie Dio
User avatar
Serpentime
Valued Contributor
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 6:38 pm
Location: The Tree of Knowledge

Postby lost_shaman » Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:45 am

Hi Serpentime,

Thanks for the welcome.

But yes, Circleville , Ohio is correct. There were actually three RAWIN targets in the Papers. The first from Circleville on July 5th, reported in the local Circleville Paper on July 6th, and two others, one from South Bloomfield, north of Circleville, and the other from outside of Circleville, both reported in local Papers on July 8th IIRC.

IMO that is significant because Circleville and South Bloomfield are both fairly close to Dayton and Wright Field where Gen. Twinning had just initiated a UFO investigation on July 3rd. I think its reasonable to assume that the local Papers from the area were being read at Wright Field, and of course Gen. Twinning was actually in New Mexico during this week while the Press was invited to watch demonstrations of "the guilty" and "mysterious" RAWIN targets at Alamogordo.
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

Re: Roswell explained? Potential NEW evidence!

Postby lost_shaman » Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:27 am

I think that I now have a serious lead as to the name and location of the potential 'Diner' AD alluded to in his 'story' allegedly based on Dr. Crary's Diary/Journal.

I will not release this information at this time. However, I will say that certain things like the location of this 'Diner' have the potential to confirm or discredit certain statements/Timelines made in this thread.
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

PreviousNext

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

cron