Monday, January 18, 2010

Roswell UFO Crash Survey Results

Once again I’ll start by pointing out that this is not a scientific survey. The participants were self-selected and although should have voted only once, the mechanism to stop multiple votes is relatively simple to defeat.

The results were almost what I expected, except for the high number of votes to explain Roswell as an experimental aircraft and the two votes that suggested some kind of White Sands missile off course.

Those reading this blog, for the most part, accept the idea that some UFOs represent alien visitation, so I expected the large number of votes for Roswell being extraterrestrial. I also know that many skeptics visit and I expected many votes for the Mogul explanation.

What I don’t understand is why anyone would think that Roswell could be explained as an experimental aircraft. What could they possibly have been testing in 1947 that isn’t overwhelmed by our technology today? There is nothing that would have been classified and experimental in 1947 that isn’t superceded by the latest, 21st century, technologies. By 2010 standards, anything from 1947 would look primitive (unless, of course, it was extraterrestrial).

If this had been some kind of experimental craft, don’t you think the Air Force would have trotted it out in 1995 when they pretended to investigate the Roswell case? If the attempts to build an atomic engine for aircraft is well known today... even the plans to dump the atomic engine, if it began to fail, have been documented, then what could they be hiding? We know where they would have dropped it according to the information easily available through multiple sources.

In fact, some of the biggest mistakes made last century are now public record. For example, that the Air Force dropped an atomic bomb close to Albuquerque in the late 1950s is a matter was published in the newspapers. And no, the bomb didn’t detonate.

So, I don’t know what logic would suggest some sort of failed experimental aircraft. The same is true of missile launches. All of them are accounted for in the records of the White Sands Missile Range. Nothing is missing, and there certainly isn’t anything in the 1947 technology that isn’t replaced by much better equipment of today.

No, neither of those two answers make sense and I’m surprised at the numbers, though relatively small, who thought these would explain what had fallen at Roswell.

To me there are but two answers currently on the table that make sense. One of them, Project Mogul simply does not cover all the facts and the documentation to prove there was even a Mogul flight in the right time frame is somewhat ambiguous.

The other is, of course, the extraterrestrial, which does a better job of covering the facts... oh, I know, the skeptics will say that the government couldn’t keep a secret like this for more than 60 years, but really, they haven’t. I mean, we’re talking about it today and have been for the last forty or so years.

And all I am saying here is that the extraterrestrial doesn’t require us to overlook testimony and other evidence. It’s by no means perfect and a bit of physical evidence would be nice, but it does cover the facts better than Mogul.

So, the results here are not very surprising. They are in keeping with those who regularly visit this blog. In the long run, they provide us with little insight into the thinking around here and tell us nothing about the reasons for those thoughts. To understand that, we need to read the comments section. Maybe someone will tell us why he or she believed that experimental aircraft made sense. If not, then we’ll just have to keep guessing about that or move on to other issues.


Bob Koford said...

I checked "alien spacecraft."

But I didn't rule out the possibility that it collided with a Project Hermes rocket, which was an Army program. Am I just trying to buck what Kevin Randle says, even though he tells us there are no unaccounted for tests? No.

I base this on evidence.

The incident that few seem to want to discuss has everything to do with it. That is the October 12, 1947 incident that I have mentioned here, several times before. It is important because the eye-witness testimonies seem to rule out meteoric impact, even though that is the final verdict. The object was described as a metallic-like cylindrical object, with a blue flame shooting out the rear. There was a terrific explosion when it impacted over the Mexican border. It was an almost identical explosion to the May 29th "errant rocket" impact near Juarez. In fact, it was the May incident that caused the military to move on the October 12 incident so verify that it wasn't another errant rocket test.

But the eyewitnesses describe an almost perfectly identical picture when compared side-to-side.

Since the documents were offerd to the Mexican authorities to prove it wasn't another A-4 test gone bad, but the eyewitnesses describe the exact same thing as occured in May, doesn't that seem to imply that there may be some undocumented testing going someone?

If the October incident was a meteor, its explosive impact would imply it was a good size one, worthy of documentation, yet there is none.

The last message regarding the October incident is a clear message on the 24th, seeking more information from General Homer, more info.

Either this was another unknown, which would have to include enemy testing, which seems absolutely absurd, or it was another v-2 rocket gone astray...for which there is no documentation.

cda said...

You just do not get it. You claim we have been talking about Roswell being ET for the last 40 or so years. Not quite. "The Roswell Incident" came out in 1980, before which nobody was talking about Roswell being ET, and you personally have been involved for, I believe, some 20 years.

But this is not really the point. A discovery of this nature would NOT be confined to the top echelons of the military or the intelligence services of one country. It belongs to the whole planet, comprising scientists of almost every discipline. Yet each and every person who insists Roswell was an ET crash must concede that the top AF guys of one country (the USA) have, in their possession, the bodies, the craft wreckage and literally mountains of official documents stashed away in secret cabinets or store rooms and have kept it there for 62 years. Furthermore, NOBODY outside this supersecret group knows the great 'truth', nobody anywhere. And this at the very time in our history when we are actively engaged on searching and exploring space around us and any life (intelligent or not) that may be there. Yet there are scientists who would give ten years of their lives to see this huge collection of ET evidence allegedly kept under wraps.

Kevin: let me remind you that there is no such thing as an ET craft. There is no such thing as an extraterrestrial intelligent being. No such being or craft is known to science. Therefore all these claims by your deluded 'witnesses' that they saw such things are poppycock. These people only say this because (in addition to a bit of publicity) they have been indoctrinated by the contemporary 'UFO is ET' ideas going around when they were interviewed (but NOT at the time of the event in '47). Look at this latest twaddle about the town running out of ice at the time because the USAF needed it all for preserving the bodies!

None of your 'witnesses' in reality have or had the slightest idea of what an ET craft or ET being looks like.

To say, as you do, that the ET solution best fits the facts of the case is a simple case of dodging a dilemma. This dilemma is that there are no such things known to science, but there seems to be no other solution to Roswell that 'explains all the facts'. My riposte is that you do not know all the facts, never will, and neither does anyone else (mainly because of the huge time lapse and the lack of almost any contemporary official documentation). The USAF did their best 45 years afterwards, came up with a reasonably good explanation which fits the facts as reported at the time, (but may not fit everything reported decades later). You say they "pretended to investigate" Roswell. Do you think you have done any better? Your 'solution' flies in the face of all scientific knowledge, and is nothing but a complete fantasy. To be fair, the fantasy did not originate with you.

There simply weren't any ETs, none at Roswell anyway, neither are there any ET corpses or ET hardware, and it is time you finally admitted this. (There is no Santa Claus either). If you still doubt me then kindly produce an ET, dead or alive, or an ET artefact or some parts of an ET spaceship, that can withstand scientific scrutiny.

And remember that 'conspiracy theory' abounds everywhere in ufology. It has to, otherwise we would have no Roswell, no Aztec, no Kecksburg, no Rendlesham, no Berwyn, no MJ-12, etc. would we?

Guy Malone said...

Hi Kevin,

I'm not a regular visitor, just saw this in a Google UFO News result. I would have checked experimental craft myself, given the choices. I agree that Mogul doesn't fully explain much, but do wonder how seriously you've investigated the Nazi/Paperclip connection, which has gained much popularity lately - albeit partly due to my "freshman effort" site on the topic being #1 on Google for "Roswell UFO crash" these days. Nick Redfern has since advanced the progeria test-subjects idea I posited with P.O.W.s.. I just mean to say that while Mogul is woefully insufficient, the other end of the spectrum (aliens) is not the only other possible explanation, based on what is known today. The fact of Nazis on U.S. soil advancing their WW2 work on exotic vehicles here was alone sufficient for a cover-up then, let alone possibilities involving human expirimentation (which was not then illegal) is sufficient to keep a cover-up going.

I do tend to agree with Dennis Balthaser when he states that as much time has gone by and as much effort was devoted to the initial cover-up and destruction of all records of the incident, there probably really is no one left alive who knows the absolute truth today. We're all theorizing based on what we can find out today.

Guy Malone
Roswell NM

Lance said...

Of course I think it is silly to deny that Project Mogul fits well as the most likely explanation for Roswell (along with faulty memories and confabulation of different events at different times).

I think Christopher may have been a bit harsh towards Kevin. Kevin is a real writer and a real researcher unlike most of the inconsequential nitwits that pervade UFOdom.* He did dig up plenty of previously unknown information about this (non) event. And much of the time he was saddled with an idiot for a partner.

I think that Kevin came by some of his apparent prejudice honestly. Because he is a good researcher, he managed to dig up plenty of the old lying bastards that this field is lousy with.

We weren't there when Frank Kaufmann (etc. etc.) told his story to Kevin for the 1st time. One can imagine that the effect might have been powerful. And now, even though Kevin knows that all of the liar's stories have fallen apart, perhaps the initial awe of seemingly uncovering something so earth-shattering has had a residual effect on his judgement?

*I just listened to a podcast that talked (on and on) about Leonard Stringfield, a "well respected" UFO researcher who literally accepted ANYTHING anyone told him about crashed saucers. The man had NO judgement at all but he passes as "respected" since the pickings are ludicrously slim.

starman said...


"The Roswell Incident" came out in 1980, before which nobody was talking about Roswell being ET."

Nonsense. Edwards mentioned it in his 1967 FLYING SAUCERS SERIOUS BUSINESS.

"It belongs to the whole planet, comprising scientists of almost every discipline."

But potentially this has a major bearing on much more than just academia. What is at stake is not just scientific ideas, but religion, economics, politics, international relations. Considering the potential impact i.e. to turn EVERYTHING upside down---not just a few scientific ideas--there is a very strong incentive to conceal it.

cda said...

Lance mentions Len Stringfield, the "respected" UFO researcher. Tim Good once described Stringfield to me in the same terms. In chap.5 of The Roswell Incident we find Stringfield prominent. He spoke to some anonymous individual (anon "because of security regulations") but who held "a responsible position", and who had seen 9 alien bodies under deep freeze at Wright-Patterson. Moreover this person had heard of 30 such bodies in total.

I believe it was Stringfield who was responsible for reviving the crashed saucer legend in 1977-78; long after Scully's landmark book of 1950.

Moore & Berlitz went along with much of Stringfield's research in the writing of their book.

Lance said...

I spoke to Stringfield on a few occasions. He seemed to have a set of well worn anecdotes that he relied on to impress the rubes. All of them depended upon one common trait--completely anonymous witnesses.

He told me that at one point the U.S. was losing X number of planes (don't remember the exact number, 6+?) per day to UFO's. I was much younger then but I still apparently had a better B.S. detector than people like Good.

Of course, in Good's case, maybe he is simply trying to find stuff to use in his book. I sense that often among the UFO authors, like Redfern, for instance. Truth is not really what is being sought. Mystery is.

Luckily, their decidedly lowbrow audience eats it all up.


Lord Balto said...

Am I mistaken in understanding that everything Brazel found on his ranch was consistent with some kind of balloon or balloon-like contraption and not an interstellar space ship or even a missile? Does anyone really believe that aliens travel across vast distances in space using craft made of balsa wood and metalized mylar sheeting?

Lance said...

Well, basically when all of the DIRECT witnesses imploded, the stuff found on the ranch became much more important in order to save Roswell.

But basically, yes, the stuff looked more or less exactly like Mogul debris. And the believers became much more reliant upon the 50 year old memories of young kids and descriptions of purportedly miraculous properties for the stuff.

Sad story.


Bob Koford said...

Have June Crane, and Frankie Rowe imploded (just two of the witnesses to the strange behavior behind the memory foil?)

If there is nothing but foil and balsa wood behind the whole affair, why isn't it inclused in any of the files released to the archives? Saying that the files aren't there because it was so mundane does not cut it, either, because that didn't keep the myriad of other mundane cases out. Why isn't the case there, with the conclusion: weather balloon?

cda said...

In answer to Bob Koford, Ruppelt tells us that only some 10 per cent of UFO reports reached Blue Book. Blue Book files show only 79 reports reached the AF in 1947 (i.e. before the project was even established), but the total in the press must have far exceeded that figure.

I assume that in the case of Roswell, which was solved, and publicised as solved, within 48 hours, there was no need to make any official records on it. Thus the lack of any files or documents "released to the archives". That is why the FBI memo and the 509th July history notes remain the only official docs ever located.

To Starman:
There were odd references to Roswell before Edwards' book. See for example Flying Saucer Review vol 1, no 1 (1955), with the Hughie Green letter. These were passing brief mentions only; there was no hint of ETs or cover-ups until the Berlitz-Moore book in 1980.

starman said...


"there was no hint of ETs or cover ups until the Berlitz-Moore book in 1980."

But Edwards' account mentioned "a disc-shaped object," the barring of newsmen from the site, a military cordon and a cover story.


"Well, basically, when all of the DIRECT witnesses imploded, the stuff on the ranch became much more important in order to save Roswell."

The "stuff on the ranch" was the first we heard of the case. Marcel sr revived Roswell based on his recollections of ranch debris. He and his son were direct witnesses who never "imploded" like Dennis.

cda said...

I do not have Edwards' book. I wonder where he got his information from, as it is certain he never interviewed anyone connected with the case. His "disc shaped" object is completely at odds with the press reports, and may be his own invention. As for the cordon and cover-up, I wonder if Edwards has extrapolated from Scully's account of the Aztec case, and added some 'juicy bits'. We cannot say, but I concede it is an oddity. Who or where were his sources? Moore & Berlitz make no reference to Edwards, nor do any later writers/researchers.
Why not? Probably because he was thought unreliable.

My own conclusion is that Edwards heard a rumor and invented or embellished the details. Having said that, I admit it is a bit of a mystery.

Bob Koford said...

"Who or where were his sources?"

Perhaps both Edwards and Keyhoes connections here was Dorothy Kilgallen?

Dennis Toth said...

If I remember correctly, in his book Flying Saucers: Top Secret (1960), Donald E. Keyhoe claims to have been told by a source at the Pentagon that an alien ship had crashed and that the original news reports in 1947 were actually true. The Roswell story has basically been known for some time, but it was largely ignored. By the way, there is an interesting account of an odd figure known as Cactus Jack who supposedly told people in a diner one night about Roswell back in the 1970s. Though the tale sounds very folk loric, it seems (more or less) to check out.

borky said...

An artist once travelled to the land of the eyeless people to initiate them into the wonders of art.

A special committee of their greatest minds was appointed to hear out his claims and, finally, the greatest of their number - the leading scientist in all the land - gave this adjudication.

"Your greatest mistake when you claimed the existence for this thing you call 'Art' was your compulsion to over elaborate - always a sign of psychosis, or fraud - by 'explaining' how 'Art' was dependent on something you call 'seeing'. Yet even then some members of the committee were willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, until you went too far and 'explained' how 'seeing' was also dependent on something you call 'eyes', inviting us to examine your own 'eyes' as 'proof' of their existence...

"Well, I'm here to inform you - what you called 'eyes' were actually a type of tumorous growth, the roots of which'd grown so deeply into your brain they'd caused you to hallucinate such things as 'Art', 'seeing' and 'eyes'.

"Your greatest misfortune, of course, was not being born and raised in a land as remarkably enlightened as our own, where all such tumorous growths are detected and removed the instant a child is born, but it's our sincere hope, in time, the lack of pressure on your brain from the tumorous growths will eventually enable you to appreciate just why it's so important to keep our upper facial sockets so free of 'eyes'."


starman said...


" is certain he never interviewed anyone connected with the case."

Edwards wrote that "What was actually found in that field I do not know. And those who DO know are not permitted to discuss it--publicly." It seems like he or someone he knew talked to some of the participants, and extracted a few tidbits.

"His "disc shaped object" is completely at odds with the press reports."

IIRC the Haut press release mentioned a disc. And Edwards almost certainly didn't derive anything from Scully. He rejected Scully's story, and even tried to talk him out of publishig it. Btw, offhand I don't remember a cordon in the Aztec story.

theo paijmans said...

Randle raises an interesting point that anybody interested in Roswell must have thought about at one time or another: what terrestrial technology would still be so innovative today, as to merit a top secret stamp after all these years? This does imply however that the processes invloving making something top secret by the powers that be are impeccable, logical and carefully maintained.

Who is to say that any secret documentation on Roswell - if it exists - was since long lost in the maze of the classified archives, destroyed long ago, or that in fact the inability or unwillingness to produce these alleged documents, is a clear sign that there is no structured historical classified documents system in place?

We could speculate on some exotic German secret weapons being tested at Roswell, but that opens up a whole morass of vaugue rumors and conflicting data.

Aside from the options of an alien or terrestrial technology, I'd look at what other elements would be so controversial in nature even today after more than four decades, so as to form an embarrassment or worse, were they to be released.

I'd opt for 'ethics'. Speculation on my part indeed, but I have since long entertained the feeling that it is against logic to postulate that:
- an alien technology so advanced as to cross the abyss of space
- to then crashland here on earth
- and not being picked up, rescued or collected by rescue or retrieval teams of that supposed alien culture
- leaving us, stone age primitives compared to 'them', with the equivalent of a nuclear bomb or worse, such as alien microbes, micro lifeforms or virusus released from the crashed ufo.

I recall that, if we send one of our own sondes to Mars, there are procedures in place to sterlize the object so as not to infect the other planet with earthly bacteriae.

I have encountered some wild theories of how certain crashed ufo's were actually meant as a gift, (why crash them, then, and not simply hand them over?)

That these theories were formulated at all perhaps points out that degree of uneasiness with the alien Roswell scenario, aspects of which I have formulated above.

Speculatively speaking: whatever happened at Rosswell could have been the product or result of some very unethical behaviour on the part of some terrestrial forces.

This line of speculative thought would lead to something akin to Redfern's Roswell scenario, or perhaps something even worse involving a high degree of unethical behaviour on the part of some very human agency. Something so condemning, that 4 decades is not nearly enough to make the truth be known.

Like I wrote above, these are my speculations. I have no proof of evidence, than perhaps pointing out some historical examples of unethical behaviour involving experiments on unwitting American citizens (it's not the U.S. alone, in fact, many democracies have these black pages in their histories). This can also be used as counter-argument: horrible, unethical and clandestine as these experiments were, they eventually became known.

BoyintheMachine said...

Mr. Randle,

After re-listening to the original radio broadcast of the army recovering a flying disk I became intruiged by something which I think is an important observation.

For those who haven't heard it in a while, you can listen to it at the link below:

What intruiged me is the description of the debris fits too perfectly with the project mogul explanation.

Has anyone ever thought that the project mogul coverstory was actually dreampt up back in 1947? This would mean that the cover-up is more complex that we could imagine.

What I'm suggesting is that the army and later air force concocted at the time a plan. It would go something like this:

"Okay, this is how it's going down, we are going to say it's a weather balloon but we are going to give a description of the wreckage that is consistant with our project mogul debris. This way if there is a public uproar we could always release a second coverstory and claim it is project mogul and then point to the description we gave out earlier as proof of such."

I'm interested in what you might thing about this.

Also, I know you are not a fan of the alien abduction phenomenon, but I just did a blog I think your readers might be interested in.

The Life Cybernetic: Why The Aliens Must Be Cyborgs

Don said...

Controversy, intrigue, name-calling...

I was 4 years old in 1947, and I can't say that I remember it all that well. I have, so far, no solid opinion on Roswell or Bentwaters or a few other famous events (or non-events, you choose), that being said - I have seen three odd aerial phenomena.

The first almost caused me to drive into a bridge railing! It turned out to be the Goodyear blimp on a dark evening over the Willamette River turning on its new lighted signboard.

The second I can't explain or dismiss: it was a light high in the night-sky over central Oregon making a 90 degree turn as I watched it. I'm not claiming ET here, I'm just looking for a workable explanation for something that isn't supposed to be possible.

The third was a mundane morning event that involved a vehicle (?) with no control surfaces nor sign of motive power nor any associated sound moving swiftly across the sky over Las Vegas in a straight line that took it over Sunrise Mountain by about 10 degrees of elevation and it looked to me to be the size of a .177 BB from approx. 10 miles away and it looked about twice the size of a basketball when I first saw it directly overhead, as it cleared the line of my porch roof.

If anybody is interested, I thought it was one of those silvery-gray balloons that car dealers sometimes use when I first saw it but I've watched them when they escape and this thing did not simply gain elevation and drift away like they do. It appeared to be traveling in a straight line away from me and gaining elevation as it went, I have no way of estimating its actual size as I don't know what the elevation was when I first saw it but it was at considerable elevation as it passed just to the North of the mountain.

That coupled with the fact that it was still visible at that distance makes me think that it was a lot higher than I realized at first and therefore a lot larger.

There was little or no noticeable wind at ground level that morning, although there might have been some at a higher elevation, still a nearly absolute west wind is a little unusual for March 24, although not impossible.

But - even if the last was something floating in a strong wind - that doesn't explain the 90 degree right turn I saw thirty years ago.

There is something out there that is not explained by our rules of physics - or it is capable of a serious acceleration perpendicular to its line of travel, without any visible jet exhaust in the dark.

Believe what you will, just don't be so quick to call other people liars.

starman said...

theo paijmans:

It's possible that the ETs just didn't have time to remove or eliminate Roswell wreckage, before the military beat them to it. Look at Botta a few years later. A wrecked craft sat alongside a highway for maybe 24 hours or more, but when Botta returned the next day with a few friends, it had been reduced to ashes, apparently by UFOs then visible overhead. If the Argentine military had been alerted in time, things might've been different.

BoyintheMachine said...

@ Starman:

My opinion has always been that if the Roswell crash was an alien craft then it was crashed on purpose, a form of Trojan Horse.

KRandle said...

All -

Computer troubles, publisher troubles, ice storms, and house troubles have all conspired against me in the last week. So, I now respond to many...


You don't get it. You reject all evidence that might suggest alien visitation because you don't believe it could happen. Your opinion is, of course, your opinion, but how often have those who reject everything been wrong. Sometimes you have to look through the telescope... and sometimes military officers are smart enough, observant enough, and have enough training to understand that they are seeing something that is truly beyond our capabilities.


Could you be more condescending? Yes, I know some of the witnesses have blown up. I've exposed some myself as have my colleagues. But there are a number of witnesses who were clearly in Roswell in 1947and who were in a position to see things who have confirmed this. Every member of Blanchard's staff, with a single exception, said it was something from another world.

Yes, I know that there are liars out there and people who claim military rank to improve their credibility. I wouldn't have though there were so many until I read Stolen Valor. One of the reasons I accepted the Del Rio crash was that the information came from a retired colonel... But no one checked his record until I did and found his tales to be less than credible.

Boy in the Machine...

I have said for years and years that the crash might have been planned. What a non-threatening way to announce yourself to we terrans (the term I prefer to Earthlings). The crash suggests vulnerability and allows us to move forward at our own speed. No, I really don't believe this is true, but it is an interesting concept.

And, if you look at some of the newspapers of 1947, it is clear they are talking about Mogul. Charles Moore told me the ladder shown in one of the launch pictures was one that he bought with petty cash after they arrived in New Mexico. Clearly the newspaper articles, or some of them, were talking about Mogul which tells me two things. They didn't care that anyone learned about the balloons and it wasn't as highly classified as those today claim.

Lance... again...

I met with Stringfield in his home more than once. He told me that he collected and published the material because he thought the information should be investigated and he didn't have time to look into them all. We all understood that many of the reports were anecdotal but if you read his Status Reports, you see that he provides analysis on many of these cases... and if you read closely, you'll learn the original date for Del Rio was the late 1940s.

starman said...


"No, I really don't believe this is true..."

Nor I. As our own experience shows, advanced doesn't mean invulnerable. A lightning strike may be the most parsimonious explanation. The craft was said to have flown around for a while before crashing, so they took an inordinate time to do what they "planned." It was mostly likely a recon mission, seeking data on n-bombs. Inasmuch as most or all of the occupants perished, it was a pretty costly way to "announce themselves" to us terrans. I don't but the Trojan Horse idea, because I don't buy Corso.

cda said...

The Royal Society are this week sponsoring a conference to commemorate the 50th anniversary of SETI, originated by Frank Drake in April 1960. His name pops up of course, as does Enrico Fermi and his famous question "where are they?". Quite a gathering of scientists. Good article about it by Michael Hanlon in today's DAILY MAIL. One quote you won't like is:
"We can safely discount the theory that we have found ET already, and that governments have kept it hidden from us. Despite all the X-files claims and conspiracy theories, there has not been a credible account of a flying saucer visitation by extraterrestrials to Earth".
I thought you might raise an eyebrow (perhaps both eyebrows) at this startling negative news.

There you are, the world's top guys at a conference, but no UFOs for them to get their teeth into. Yet cosmologist Paul Davies tells us that we should be looking for 'artefacts' left behind by the ETs, no not on earth but scattered round the solar system, i.e. anything he says, "that looks fishy".
Have you found anything that looks fishy yet? At Roswell or anywhere else? (I mean actual hardware of course, not tittle-tattle).