Well,
we have a new solution to the Roswell case. No, it’s not a weather balloon as
the Army Air Forces claimed in 1947 and no, it’s not a Project Mogul balloon
that many skeptics and the Air Force have claimed, starting with Robert Todd in
the early 1990s (or late 1980s) but something called a satelloon. This was, is,
a huge polyethylene balloon that had been covered with a thin layer of aluminum
to enhance the reflective properties and create a passive communications
satellite or something like that.
Dr.
Bob W. Gross appeared this last week (June 12) on Martin Willis’ show, UFO Live.
Gross, who had lived in New Mexico from 2001 to 2010 and who traveled all over
the state, thought that he had the solution to the Roswell case. Naturally, I
was skeptical. You can listen here (Roswell begins in the second hour):
And you can read more about his theories here:
Here’s
the problem as I see it. Gross has cherry-picked his evidence to bolster his theory.
He talked of the debris field and the metallic residue that had been collected
there. These were fragments of one of these aluminumized balloons that had
exploded and rained down the debris or so he claimed. Apparently, they can
explode. See:
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4308/ch6.htm
But
the problem is that he has currently failed to mention the other debris found there as described to
me by Bill Brazel. Brazel said:
There
was only three items involved. Something on the order of balsa wood and something
on the order of heavy gauge monofilament fishing line and a little piece of… it
wasn’t really aluminum foil and it wasn’t really lead foil but it was on that
order…
 |
| Bill Brazel. Photo copyright by Kevin Randle. |
While
the piece of aluminum-like material could have been the remains of one of these
satelloons, the other two pieces were not. According to Brazel, you could shine
a light in one end and have it come out the other, or, in other words, he was
talking about fiber optics. And the balsa like material was so strong that he
couldn’t get a shaving using his pocket knife.
Gross
also said that these satelloons took on a disk shape, at least the early
versions did and that some of them were tested in New Mexico, hidden in the
Mogul arrays. In my many communications with Charles Moore, among others,
nothing like that was ever mentioned, and I suspect that if the Air Force could
have connected these two events together, they would have done so.
 |
| Charles Moore. Photo copyright by Kevin Randle. |
The
real problem with this theory is that I can find nothing to support the idea
that the testing was going on in New Mexico in 1947. In fact, there is quite
the history available on the topic and the research around it. You can find
more about all this and Project Echo satelloons here:
And
the history of these “Giant Spheres” here:
And
here:
And to confuse the issue even more, or maybe clarify some of the research into it, take a look at this:
While I can find nothing that suggests any of this was going on in 1947, Gross alluded to witnesses and documents that could do that. If true, then he might have something. However, it is difficult to ignore the information about the debris provided by Brazel and Jesse Marcel, Sr., and several others who handled it in 1947, which doesn’t fit with his descriptions.
http://badufos.blogspot.com/2017/09/another-nonsensical-explanation-for.html#comment-form
While I can find nothing that suggests any of this was going on in 1947, Gross alluded to witnesses and documents that could do that. If true, then he might have something. However, it is difficult to ignore the information about the debris provided by Brazel and Jesse Marcel, Sr., and several others who handled it in 1947, which doesn’t fit with his descriptions.
And,
while Gross said that he found no testimony of anyone seeing the flying saucer
crash, there are those who reported seeing a more intact structure, not on the
debris field, but on a secondary site some distance away.
No,
the problem is that all the information that I have been able to find does not
put any of these strange balloons in New Mexico in 1947. Unless he can do that,
this falls into the same category of the anthropomorphic dummies that Captain
James McAndrew used in his attempt to explain the bodies reported by some of
the witnesses. The timing is just flat wrong. If the dummies weren’t being
dropped in 1947 and the satelloons weren’t being tested in 1947, then the
explanations fail at that point. We must wait, however, for Gross to provide
the additional documentation and witnesses that he claims to have before
providing a final analysis. That will be coming in his book.
I listened to the show. I don't take issue with Dr. Gross' Kecksburg explanation because I've never at any time believed this was anything other than a piece of something that was launched from Earth that came back down in an unexpected way. This one is case closed for me.
ReplyDeleteI thought the Roswell Satelloon was a big stretch, even though I've always believed that what happened at Roswell was a top secret test gone awry. Just because Brazel and Marcel didn't recognize the debris material, that doesn't make it ET, not by a long shot.
I wasn't convinced by Dr. Gross the accident at Roswell was caused by a Satelloon (how I love that word!). But I still believe it was a purely terrestrial accident.
According to the Mogul project records, polyethylene balloons were not available during their June campaign. If they had been, the Mogul team would have used them. As I recall, they were available later that year and basically solved the constant altitude problem. That set the stage for really long duration flights (multiple days).
ReplyDeleteGross' explanation for the Kecksburg incident as being a film bucket from a KH Corona spacecraft is easily debunked. The only Corona spacecraft that was in the air that day was the KH-4A 1027.
ReplyDeleteHere is a pointer to the launch data:
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraftDisplay.do?id=1965-102A
The film buckets were returned to Earth two days later and accounted for.
There are other discrepancies, as well.
Hi Kevin
ReplyDeleteInteresting, that after all these years, we still don't have a logical, proven terrestrial explanation...
Regards
Nitram
Does Dr. Gross account for the special properties of the metal? Account for multiple crash sites? Account for a 500 foot long gouge in the Foster Ranch debris field? And account for the wood carvings of the "little men" observed by Sgt. Thomas Gonzales?
ReplyDeleteOn or about Thursday, June 14, 2018, Kevin Randle wrote: “The real problem with this theory is that I can find nothing to support the idea that the testing was going on in New Mexico in 1947.” Fortunately, I am an aggressive researcher. I DID find something to support the idea that such testing was going on in New Mexico during 1947. Randle went on further to state: “While I can find nothing that suggests any of this was going on in 1947, Gross alluded to witnesses and documents that could do that.” Randle is correct. I do have documents that support my findings. But, at this time, I don’t want to ruin my book-in-progress for anybody. Moreover, Randle is also correct when he states: “We must wait, however, for Gross [Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross] to provide the additional documentation and witnesses that he claims to have before providing a final analysis.”
ReplyDeleteLarry's statements above are somewhat weak and inaccurate. The two golden film buckets were NOT returned to Earth two days later [December 11, 1965]. An accurate account of the Kecksburg UFO mystery is included in a whitepaper report that can be found at www.bobwenzelgross.com.
ReplyDeleteADDENDA: Dr. Gross writes in Part 2 of "An Extraterrestrial Flying Disk Crashed Near Roswell in 1947: Not a UFO (May 18, 2018), [see www.theufochronicles.com] as follows:
ReplyDelete"Colonel Thomas J. DuBose was present when the alleged Roswell wreckage arrived at Fort Worth in 1947. DuBose was brought into General Ramey’s office where he viewed the rubble. Decades later, during an interview, DuBose was asked if the original debris in General Ramey’s office had been switched with the remnants of a weather balloon. DuBose answered that the material was never switched."
This statement is inaccurate to the extent that anyone equates the "wreckage" arriving from Roswell with the "rubble" on the floor of General Ramey's office. They are not one and the same. While one can quibble over whether there was a switch made or not, according to Col. DuBose, the "rubble" photographed in Ramey’s office was part of a weather balloon, and this same "rubble" was not the "wreckage" from Roswell. Instead the "wreckage" from Roswell was flown on a special flight from Ft. Worth to Wright-Patterson. According to DuBose, this special flight occurred even despite Gen. Ramey informing [misleading/lying to] the press that he was cancelling the special flight to Wright-Patterson.
Finally, I note that Dr. Gross uses "alleged Roswell wreckage," "rubble," "original debris," "remnants of a weather balloon," and "material" all in the same paragraph as descriptive terminology. Such variety of description cannot help but obfuscate truthful meaning herein.
Bob Gross -
ReplyDeleteUntil you present the evidence (and I understand your desire to hold it close to the vest prior to the publication of your book) we have nothing to corroborate. I can't review the documents or talk to the witnesses. I can only go by what I have found which suggests that this is not the answer.
Nor have you addressed the descriptions of the material found on the Foster ranch by Brazel. Mack Brazel and Jesse Marcel, Sr. handled it then. Mack Brazel showed it to the Proctors, and a couple of others which was described in affidavits that have been published in a variety of sources. Bill Brazel handled it later and described it in terms that do not seem to lead to satelloons. Of the men in General Ramey's office in July 1947, none of them seemed to talk of anything that matched the descriptions of a satelloon. What was seen in Ramey's office was clearly the remains of a neoprene rubber weather balloon and a rawin radar target.
We will have to see if the evidence that will be presented at some future date fits the facts and leads us to a satelloon.
All -
ReplyDeleteColonel DuBose is on the record, meaning on video tape, and in interviews with others saying that the material was switched. The idea that it was not can be traced to Jaime Shandera who has no evidence that DuBose ever said such a thing to him. Don Ecker and Kris Palmer (of NBC's Unsolved Mysteries) reported that Dubose said the debris had been switched. Others who interviewed DuBose said the same thing. This whole sorry episode has been discussed here and in magazines. It is too bad that Bob Gross missed that.
Bob Gross wrote:
ReplyDelete“An accurate account of the Kecksburg UFO mystery is included in a whitepaper report that can be found at www.bobwenzelgross.com.”
And for which you want to charge 5 dollars.
Why can’t you just summarize in a few sentences what the main points are?
Bob. When the "case closed" report came out, why would the US Air Force lie, just for the sake of a satelloon?
ReplyDeleteI totally understand why they still might want to cover up a flying saucer crash and blame it on Project Mogul...but would they still be trying to cover up the crash of a satelloon as late as 1994?
In short, if it was a satelloon and not a Mogul, why wouldn't they have told us that in 1994...What would be the point of lying?
Larry:
ReplyDeleteI have a doctorate from Penn State University--a highly ranked research institution. My doctoral dissertation was awarded an "excellent" rating because of high quality research. I have been a UFO field investigator since 1985. Yes, I am asking $5.00 for the whitepaper reports on my website [www.bobwenzelgross.com]. How much does one usually pay for manuscripts written by UFO researchers? I'm sorry, but I can't summarize decades of intense research in a few sentences. Regardless, some articles that I have written may be found on www.theufochronicles.com. You should be able to find my 2017 Kecksburg article there. My article "An Extraterrestrial Flying Disk Crashed Near Roswell in 1947: Not a UFO" (May 18, 2018) is available there to read as well. I hope that helps you out. My newest book-in-progress will provide much more additional information than my current articles and whitepapers contain. Best of luck, Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross. . . .
As a follow-on to my previous comment, readers who-like me-are unwilling to pay $5 for the privilege of reading Bob Gross's "whitepaper" may be interested in a thorough debunking of his claims that appeared on the badufos blogspot in September of 2017:
ReplyDeletehttp://badufos.blogspot.com/2017/09
In that discussion, they display Bob's grandiosity with his introductory words:
"On or about June 1, 2016, I declared that the Kecksberg case would be my inaugural attempt at unravelling an established (fifty year old) UFO mystery. I gathered and analyzing (sic) new relevant data from the existing literature. Thus, I closed the Kecksberg case, once and for all, by applying scientific methodology to aggressive research. I strongly believe I solved the Kecksberg enigma."
The essence of Bob's explanation is:
"Instead of heading south, the rocket system headed for a launch trajectory that would cut a northeasterly path across the United States…In an attempt to regain control of Satellite KH-4A 1027's orientation, the foreword (sic) recovery vehicle (SRV-1) was separated from the spacecraft. The separation was done at some time before the engine burn that would have injected the satellite into orbit…..Fortunately, jettisoning SRV-1 resolved the Corona satellite's attitude control problem for the time being"
As the writers at Badufos document, every single sentence in that explanation is total bullshit. The "explanations" are just made up out of nothing but Bob's vivid imagination and are absolutely contradicted by the available records. In addition to the information which I pointed to previously at the NASA website, the once classified records of that particular mission were declassified by the National Reconnaissance Office in 1997. They show in no uncertain terms that the Thor and Agena stages both functioned normally and injected the Corona spacecraft into the intended (polar) orbit. Once on orbit, the pressurized gas attitude control system of the spacecraft failed to switch from the high-gain mode into the low-gain mode, which resulted in depleting the gas at a higher than planned rate. By orbit 15, the spacecraft was no longer able to maintain sufficient pointing accuracy to produce useable photos, so the first film bucket was returned to Earth on orbit 17 and the second one was returned on orbit 33. The declassified documents give the exact coordinates (in the Pacific Ocean) of the locations where the film buckets were recovered. It explains that the first one was recovered in the "lifeboat" mode (i.e., after it fell into the ocean) and the second one was recovered while still on the parachute. Since the orbital period of the spacecraft was 1.5 hours, 33 orbits amounts to 49.5 hours, or a mission duration of just over 2 days.
Hi Kevin,
ReplyDeleteI have read that Mac Brazel was placed under guard for about a week following the events. Is this aspect true or false?
Thanks in advance,
Adam S -
ReplyDeleteAccording to what his son told me, what various neighbors told and what Major Edwin Easley the base provost marshal told me, Brazel was held for a number of days on the base and in the guest house.
Thanks Kevin for responding so quickly. Did Easley or Brazel's son ever say why he was held for so long on the base?
ReplyDelete"And, while Gross said that he found no testimony of anyone seeing the flying saucer crash, there are those who reported seeing a more intact structure, not on the debris field, but on a secondary site some distance away."
ReplyDelete--------------------
The thing to remember about that is: none of the original Roswell eyewitnesses mentioned anything about a intact craft or bodies. That's an important distinction because the pro-UFO Roswell people want to tell you that people like Jesse Marcel would have known about Mogul....but he missed this.
And by "original eyewitnesses" I mean those who came forward in the late 70's early 80's time frame and were first hand eyewitnesses. (And by the way, that automatically disqualifies (people like) Barney Barnett because he was never interviewed by any UFO investigator on this subject.)
09rja -- Sgt. Thomas Gonzales was a "first hand eyewitness" who stated "There were bodies" whom he called "little men." Although Gonzales may not have come forward in your "late 70s early 80s" timeframe, why should his statements be discounted on this basis?
ReplyDeleteWell to be more accurate, Gonzales's story surfaced (IIRC) in the mid-90's. At that point I have some real questions about anyone coming forward.....considering the fact that so many who came forward during this period (i.e. from about the late 80's on) were obvious frauds.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is, famous cases like this drag a lot of people out of the woodwork. Research any other famous conspiracy theory and you will find the same thing.
Anyone who takes a honest look at this would note what I have and ask themselves: How come none of the original eyewitnesses saw intact craft or bodies? The answer is because this whole thing (i.e. Roswell) is just a urban legend that got out of control.
Worst of all, it gives UFO research a bad name. Just because Roswell didn't involve aliens doesn't mean we haven't been visited. (Although I'm not 100% convinced of that either.) Things like this distract would-be (really good) researchers from looking into the whole thing.
First we had the official 'weather balloon' explanation. Decades later we had the official 'Mogul balloon' explanation. 20 years later still we have the 'sateloon' explanation (i.e. another form of official balloon). Why all these variations on such a simple theme? The thing was simply a balloon of some kind, NOT an ET craft of any kind (unless such ET craft happen, by chance, to resemble terrestrial balloons!).
ReplyDeleteI don't consider we have advanced one iota on this case in 70 years. Some of us are still talking 'ballooney'. Others are still talking ETHology.
Oh and I forgot two other pieces of ballooney. One was John Keel's 'Fugo balloon' idea - one of those early post-war balloons, bearing destructive fire bombs, released by the Japs in 1945 finally crash-landed in NM two years later (!). There was also the theme later developed by Nick Redfern with his Japanese 'progeria victims' idea, also involving balloons of a kind.
ReplyDeleteTo Paul Young:
ReplyDeleteIn 1946, an independent study of Earth satellites observed that a satellite launch would have a dramatic effect on world opinion, and that a satellite might have additional promising uses as an extraterrestrial communications relay. Although the political and psychological aspects of launching communications satellites were considered to be great, related research about the complex nature of initiating spacecraft flights needed to continue into the future. Therefore, in addition to eventually serving as passive communications satellites, high-altitude balloons were used to measure such things as the density of the air in the upper atmosphere and provide data related to the design of future spacecraft. Thus, the missions would have generated sensitive data for use in upcoming programs, projects, and experiments. . .
To cda:
ReplyDeleteOutstanding comment. Personally, over the last few years, I've started to detect a "perfect storm" of conflicting information caused by researchers and others disseminating misinformation, correct information, and disinformation into the same pool. Any method of dispersing differing information seems to result in conflicting data. Conflicting information inhibits creative thought and decreases the ability to solve problems. Thus, conflicting information causes confusion and makes it difficult for even an eloquent scientist to explain a given phenomenon—let alone complex phenomena commonly known as UFOs. Is such a perfect storm a product of the act of wittingly or unwittingly stirring up and/or altering facts? My instincts tell me we (the public) are soon to find out. Again, cda, I appreciate the depth of your comment . . . Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross . . . .
Bob W.Gross:
ReplyDeleteMy comment had no real depth to it, nor was it intended to. I am no expert on balloons or ballooney.
My stance on Roswell has consistently been this: There is NO WAY a genuine ET crash or landing on earth would still be top secret after 70 years. In fact it is doubtful the US authorities would even try to keep it secret, beyond perhaps a few days or weeks. Think of the huge loss to science the world over if only a few top military personnel of one country possessed this great ET secret. And of course they would have to hope (!) that such an event never occurred again anywhere on earth, in case someone else, maybe in China or Russia, announced it first.
09rja: The original eyewitnesses that came forward are a small subset of all Roswell event eyewitnesses. Concluding that none of the original eyewitnesses saw intact craft or bodies is unfounded.
ReplyDeleteYour answer that Roswell "is just a [sic] urban legend that got out of control" makes no sense given what is known about the case.
What gives UFO research a bad name are the defamatory pronouncements of those who seek to cover-up the truth of alien visitation here on earth.
Agreed cda. I think it was put best by Ted Koppel to Stanton Friedman (when Friedman debated Phillip Klass on Nightline (in 1987) on MJ-12):
ReplyDelete“I don't know how familiar you are with Washington-I am very familiar with Washington-and I know that it is almost impossible to keep a story of that sort of dimension, without some leak or another filtering out of from some part of the bureaucracy or government establishment over a period of 40 days, let alone 40 years.”
Exactly right. The government doesn't have a particularly good track record keep something like this a secret. They are good at covering up stuff like a guidance system for a missile.....but things people would care about if they knew? Not so much.
@ John Steiger: By my definition of who the original eyewitnesses are......that's the only thing to conclude. NONE of them (who were alive and interviewed in the late 70's/early 80's) said ANYTHING about a intact craft and bodies.
ReplyDeleteFacts are facts. And it doesn't bode well for the Roswell advocates.
I seek to cover up nothing. I originally (in the time period this first came out (i.e.the late 70's/early 80's)) thought this was the real deal. But I know better now.
Following is a brief summary of my perspective related to the 1947 Roswell UFO Mystery:
ReplyDelete1945, Science fiction writer, Arthur C. Clarke, published an article about developing artificial satellite stations used as extraterrestrial relays in a passive communications satellite system.
1945, Work began on developing polyethylene, non-extensible high-altitude balloons.
1946, The Research Division of the College of Engineering of New York University entered into a Contract with Watson Laboratories of the Air Materiel Command to design, develop, and fly metalized, polyethylene, constant-level, high-altitude, balloons.
1947, A New York University-sponsored high-altitude balloon project was established in New Mexico. This project was responsible for at least some of the flying disk reports during those times.
1947, On or about July 3rd, the first polyethylene non-extensible high altitude balloon flight experiment was launched from Alamogordo, New Mexico—approximately 100 miles from Roswell as the balloon flies. There was a loss of lift during that fateful flight.
1947, On or about July 8th, the Roswell UFO legend began.
Valid and reliable documentation is available.
Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross
Dear 09rja: Valid and reliable documentation about the Roswell UFO-related events I introduced here via a brief summary on or about June 27, 2018 is available through primary sources (official records, raw research data, reports, etc.). Thank you in advance for your cooperation and understanding . . . Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross . . . .
ReplyDeleteCDA wrote:
ReplyDelete"There is NO WAY a genuine ET crash or landing on earth would still be top secret after 70 years."
This comment has been shown to be flawed in earlier postings.
The Ramey memo is still "secret" after 70 years and while it in itself maybe won't prove anything, it is just one of numerous examples of secrets being kept for decades...
"The Ramey memo is still "secret" after 70 years and while it in itself maybe won't prove anything, it is just one of numerous examples of secrets being kept for decades..." ~Nitram Ang
ReplyDelete--------------------------
Again we are talking concealing something that actually means something. Everytime a UFO group has pried documents out of the government (in a FOIA lawsuit)....what did they wind up proving? Nothing. What secret of this magnitude has the government ever been able to conceal for decades? Nothing I can think of.
Thanks for your reply Bob.
ReplyDeleteI still think it strange that the US Govt would go to such lengths as lying, in the 1994 "case closed" investigation and conclusion, by insisting a Satelloon was a Mogul balloon. It doesn't seem (to me) sensitive enough, 50 odd years later to still want to cover it up. However, if it were an ET UFO that crashed at Roswell...then I understand why that would still be covered up.
We'll have to agree to differ on that one.
cda...
I know we've talked about this before but your comment,
"There is NO WAY a genuine ET crash or landing on earth would still be top secret after 70 years. In fact it is doubtful the US authorities would even try to keep it secret, beyond perhaps a few days or weeks."...
...absolutely baffles me.
That scenario might be feasible if certain governments knew a certain amount about the "aliens"...
But what if the Govt were aware of UFO's as early as 1947, realised beyond doubt they were not "ours" but knew scant else about the situation and hadn't really progressed in the years since.
Would they announce that "ET's" visit Earth but "we don't know why they are here, where they are from, what their agenda is and, BTW, they fly about and land where they damned want...and we can do now't about it."
Much easier to absolutely deny the existence of the things in the first place...Me thinks.
Just a few collected thoughts and questions:
ReplyDelete— I can see why an artificial very high altitude “satelloon” might be classified (as noted) for the reasons shared. Secret projects are often imbedded into other secret projects. But I too remain skeptical until more data is presented.
— All the witness commentary about dead bodies, gouges in the desert, etc. has largely been proven to be unsubstantiated and very flawed. People still claiming those are proven facts have just failed to acknowledge that these witnesses have for decades altered and enhanced their stories of which many are second hand anyway. Most all have been proven to be lies or made up fictional details.
— Brazel, the Proctors, and Marcel Jr, may recall handling odd material, and they were first hand witnesses, but as time and science has proven memories become altered with age, enthusiasm, and repetitive story telling. What they handled may not have had as much unusual properties as we think.
— The Ramey memo is NOT top secret. That’s just pure bunk.
— As Kevin has pointed out, the balloon arrays documented in the Mogul effort have never shown to have included any satelloons. Hard to imagine if they were used why they weren’t mentioned in the flight books since everything else was as far as we can tell.
— Polyethylene balloons had just been developed and if I am not mistaken (I might be) memory tells me it was the Kellogg Corp. that was the first to create balloons using this material. I’d like to see some documentation on who manufactured these satelloons since that should readily be available and hardly a secret anymore.
— DuBose might have testified the material found was switched, but that could also fit the satelloon theory as well. Even if it doesn’t fit, then even though DuBose stated this, it’s also important to note A LOT of witnesses claimed things thought to be true and later found out to be false. Like them he might just have been telling stories or doing the best he could to recall old memories incorrectly.
CDA wrote:
ReplyDelete"There is NO WAY a genuine ET crash or landing on earth would still be top secret after 70 years."
In principle, I agree with this. BUT, that is not to say the government has done a very good job of suppressing information when/where needed. For instance, in the 1940s human radiation experiments were conducted on mentally disabled children and prisoners. This was kept quiet for 50 years until an investigative journalist, researching a completely unrelated issue, found documents detailing the experiments in an Air Force storage area. Likewise, if not for the few CIA documents which survived Richard Helms destruction, we still might not know about the hideous MKULTRA program.
Just some food for thought. Cheers.
“1947, On or about July 3rd, the first polyethylene non-extensible high altitude balloon flight experiment was launched from Alamogordo, New Mexico—approximately 100 miles from Roswell as the balloon flies. There was a loss of lift during that fateful flight.”
ReplyDeleteThis is the claim that has to be shown as valid with definitive documentation.
To Brian Bell:
ReplyDeleteThe claim you referenced has been shown to be valid. To my knowledge, the claim is documented and has been available to the public for at least two [2] decades according to my research. On or about June 14, 2018, Randle wrote on his blog: "No, the problem is that all the information that I have been able to find does not put any of these strange balloons in New Mexico in 1947." To me, his statement seems to indicate that he may not have found the information that I uncovered. But, I honestly can't explain why he couldn't find the information that I found related to the July 3, 1947 New Mexico experimental balloon flight. I found that seemingly valid and reliable relevant information in a reasonable amount of time too. And, I found it in more than one place. However, I am a seasoned, aggressive, scientific researcher and former field investigator with a terminal degree from a respected brick-and-mortar university. But if you don't believe my claim, Brian, please feel free to search for the information yourself. It is still out there--I recently checked on Google. Also, details about the 1947 "strange balloons," as well as much more information, will be available through my latest book-in-progress. Good luck, Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross . . .
Brian Bell:
ReplyDeleteYou are quite right about the Ramey memo. It is in Ramey's hand and has been partially deciphered (subject to a lot of dispute). There is zilch to show it is or ever was TOP SECRET. Naturally the ETHers insist it was top secret, but isn't that exactly what you would expect them to say?
I have no strong views on the satelloon idea. It is another kind of balloon and may or may not be the answer.
Paul Young:
Do you really think an event of this nature (a proven ET visit) would, or could, still be hushed up after all this time? It makes you wonder what is the point of doing any astronomical/space research in the first place if, as soon as we have real evidence of ET intelligence, the authorities of one country are going to hush it all up - presumably forever and a day.
It is just conspiracy theory gone mad.
Bob Gross -
ReplyDeleteI have lots of information on the "Mogul" flights in New Mexico, including that the July 3, 1947, was cancelled when the V-2 launch scheduled for that day was postponed. They attempted V-2 launch on the evening of July 3 resulted in injuries to a number of people. My point is that I have no information on a Satelloon embedded in those flights and I do have diagrams of the arrays as they were constructed for those flights. I will note here two things - One, I use the term Mogul for easy identification because, as Charles Moore said, this was a University of New York project... it was tied to Mogul, but what was happening in New Mexico was done with unclassified equipment and was even reported in the newspapers on July 10. And second in my conversations with Moore, among others, they mentioned nothing about satelloons, or other equipment for other experiments being tied in with theirs. The current documentation does not support your suggestions of a satelloon in New Mexico in July 1947. As I say, I await documentation to support your theory.
CDA -
The problem you face, but don't seem to understand, is that message traffic in the military is a perishable item. Once received and acted on in some fashion, it is usually destroyed. The Ramey Memo, if received at the FWAAF, would have bee destroyed at some point after its usefulness had lapsed. The sending agency might have keep a copy for historical purposes, but even that is unlikely, given the circumstances. I doubt we will ever be able to find the original because it no longer exists. Our best hope is for a consensus reading of the memo in Ramey's hand, though it seems that technology is unavailable at this time and might never become available given the way the photograph was taken and the possibility that parts of it were never in focus. I think a best guess is all that we'll ever have and I don't see the two sides on this ever agreeing on the wording.
To Bob:
ReplyDeleteI don’t know why Kevin wouldn’t have found this information either if, as you say, it’s been out there for at least two decades.
Kevin seems (to me) to be a competent researcher (especially on Roswell) with a good dose of skepticism until substantiated with more details. I don’t always agree with his conclusions, and researchers do make mistakes, but that’s to be expected with any of this material. That’s not to say your research skills are lacking, but even those of us who follow the Roswell issue ever so lightly have spent time searching for related information. It just seems to me Kevin, and others here, would have come across this documentation by now. If the satelloons aren’t documented in the Mogul flight logs I would be very surprised. Errors do occur, but if testing them in a combined array occurred more than once then there’d be an official paper trail somewhere in the Mogul documentation and by the manufacturer.
Paul and CDA:
In some sense you’re both right. Obviously governments are capable of hiding information and classifying it for decades — no one is arguing otherwise. But as we know the examples you refer to are known to the public because they were eventually declassified, found by order of the courts and released, or in some way “leaked” to the public. I recently learned that some 30 US Infantrymen who fought with the White Russians against the Communists in 1918 were held as POWs and died in Soviet captivity with the US Government never officially acknowledging this until 1990. That would be 70+ years being classified. But to CDAs point, discovering alien life in crashed saucers would at some point in time leak because of the profound nature and implications. Even now someone would leak it if they knew. So was Lazar telling the truth? Hum.
But more importantly I’m still wanting to see the documentation for satelloons since I’m skeptical they were actually used in Mogul flights. Certainly the earliest initial newspaper reports verbally described balloon like material, but that doesn’t mean it was from satelloons. It also doesn’t mean it was from an alien spaceship.
Paul Young wrote:
ReplyDelete"your comment - "There is NO WAY a genuine ET crash or landing on earth would still be top secret after 70 years. In fact it is doubtful the US authorities would even try to keep it secret, beyond perhaps a few days or weeks."...
...absolutely baffles me."
I would say that most of the readers are baffled by the above statement, so you're not on your own Paul...
There is a chance we have been visited and if so, this is a secret to a relatively small number of people. There is no reason to inform the rest of the population, so many years after the fact...
BB wrote:
"
The Ramey memo is NOT top secret. That’s just pure bunk."
I don't think anyone has made this claim in the current posting - what I maintain is that what is written on the document is not clear and therefore remains somewhat of a secret - even after 70 years (regardless of it's importance or not).
Kevin is correct that the memo may never be read to the satisfaction of everyone (hopefully he will be proven wrong in time) but I do disagree with Kevin, that if the Roswell event is ET I am "almost certain" the Ramey memo will directly relate to it.
But I digress ...
@ cda... "Do you really think an event of this nature (a proven ET visit) would, or could, still be hushed up after all this time?
ReplyDeleteBut it hasn't been hushed up! (Despite their herculean efforts...)
It nearly was hushed up and then (30 odd years later) Marcel Snr blabbed.
Whether or not Roswell was an ET event, I'm not totally convinced, but it's the way the US govt/military have acted from day one that makes me think something exceptional happened there...something more significant than a balloon, (be it weather, Mogul or Dr Gross's suggested satelloon).
So it hasn't been hushed up,(even the tribe folk of Papua New Guinea have heard of Roswell) it's been repeatedly lied about and flustered over ever since.
It does seem lessons were learned though. After the way the American's dealt with Roswell, when Rendlesham occurred 30 odd years later...
UK govt's tactic was to.
1..state that it's of "no defence significance", and
2..simply refuse to discuss it further.
To Nitram:
ReplyDeleteI was referring to your own quote (below) regarding the Ramey Memo being classified “top secret”.
I don’t think that piece of paper in his hand in that photo has the answers anyone is looking for. And to assume after that photo shoot it was rushed to secret files in Washington is a bit much. There’d be a copy on the other end as well.
You said:
“The Ramey memo is still "secret" after 70 years and while it in itself maybe won't prove anything, it is just one of numerous examples of secrets being kept for decades...”
ReplyDeleteTo Dr. Wenzel:
Well I’ve read your article at https://www.theufochronicles.com/2018/05/an-extraterrestrial-flying-disk-crashed-near-Roswell.html?m=1 and found it interesting.
Your theory is plausible, but in the article there are “gaps” that still don’t definitively show what crashed at Roswell was a satelloon precursor to Echo 1 (which was launched 14 years later in 1961).
In a nutshell your claim is embodied in your quote as follows:
“The type of rockets Dr. Goddard and his team were working on would be needed to inject Clarke’s passive satellite communications system into orbit around Earth. Members of Dr. Goddard’s rocketry team were living and working near Roswell in 1947. Therefore, it is highly probable that in 1947, an experimental metalized inflated polyethylene terephthalate (PET) balloon, intended for future use as a US government Project Echo passive communications satellite, was covertly undergoing testing as part of, or in conjunction with, a Project Mogul balloon train. The Project Echo precursor had instruments added to it that included some type of temperature sensors to monitor the prototype balloon's skin temperature and pressure sensors to monitor internal pressure. The metal-coated PET balloon was struck by lightning in the vicinity of Roswell, New Mexico during a severe thunder storm. The prototype inflatable metalized balloon—designed to function as an extraterrestrial relay—exploded into shreds when hit by lightning. Hundreds of shards from the metal-covered balloon floated down upon a ranch near Roswell.”
But we have no actual documentation:
- That Goddard was test flighting satelloons on his rockets.
- That Satelloons were used in Mogul from 1947 through 1949 as a sub classified project of Echo 1.
- That Flight #4 ever flew.
You seem to indicate Flight #4 did fly and was....what?....intentionally not recorded because it contained a satelloon in the array?
As Kevin has stated, “Mogul Flight No. 4 was cancelled. It did not fly, there is no record of it anywhere and that number is skipped in the accounting.”
Also you stated (below) that Mogul used polyethylene balloons, but that isn’t quite correct either. Records indicate they used neoprene until sometime after “the crash” when they switched to the newer material.
Dr. Wenzel:
“At first, the Air Force’s balloon-related experiments used neoprene meteorological balloons. Later, the use of polyethylene balloons was pioneered. Project Mogul used polyethylene balloons manufactured in New York and in Minneapolis.”
Also that’s an incredibly long ramp up time for Echo 1. : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Echo
The Echo 1 project documentation would need to (and would if true) show satelloon testing in 1947 for this to theory to work. So Echo 1, Mogul, and Goddard’s experiments would all need to have 1947 era documentation for this explanation to be true.
I don’t see the evidence, only theory. Plausible, but too many gaps.
To say it hasn't been "hushed up" ignores the fundamental fact we are sitting here arguing about it. Is anyone debating if Watergate actually happened? Iran-Contra? Of course not.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with a lot of these "leaks" is: they never go anywhere and unravel the mystery. In Watergate one leak was "Deep Throat" (i.e. Mark Felt). Although his identity was concealed for years, the information he revealed isn't contested. In the case of Roswell, just about every Deep Throat that has come forward has had real question marks appear about the information they supplied and/or their credibility.
But to put this in a different perspective.....consider the absolute crises we are facing in issues of Global Warming and energy. (Both issues are (of course) directly related.) Does anyone think that the government would conceal a source of energy that could directly fix both problems.....even if they didn't know how to harness it yet? I think even the most rabid government hater would find that hard to believe.
09rja...You're comparing Watergate with what could have been first conclusive proof of ET visitation?
ReplyDeleteStrewth..It might have been a big brouhaha in the US but the rest of the world watched on with mild bemusement.
Only in the Excited States of America could there have been such shock over a politician going to the extent of burglary in order to gain (possible) advantage over his rivals and then lying about it.
An E.T event is a different kettle of fish. Something not just the US govt would want keeping quiet, but many others as well.
..................................................................
BTW. Here in UK, some papers are covering (again) the story that proves that, at least up till 1997, UK was STILL interested in Flying Saucers despite totally denying it in the aftermath of Rendlesham. (Similar to USA denying interest after "Blue Book")
It doesn't prove ET, of course, but it does prove that even though you and cda are sceptics, the guys tasked with the job within the UK govt certainly aren't.
They'll de-bunk it till the cows come home... but they sure ain't sceptics.
(And if UK are interested then so are US and the other "5 Eyes" because they're all hand in glove.)
Link below
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5906113/Secret-dossier-reveals-British-spies-spent-half-century-trying-catch-UFO.html?ITO=1490
Brian Bell wrote:
ReplyDelete..."regarding the Ramey Memo being classified “top secret”."
I never said it was "top secret" - just that it was secret because we didn't know, for certain, what it said.
The main point which some people are struggling with is that secrets can be kept for decades. For example, we only relatively recently discovered the identity of "Deep Throat" as referenced in an earlier comment.
Shame we found out so soon - proves you can keep a secret, but not for seventy years I guess, but that's debunkery for you...
The identity of Deep Throat was meaningless. (Just something for people to cheerfully debate on the talk show circuit in the decades that followed.) The info he provided is unquestionable. Not so with Roswell.
ReplyDeleteYes I am comparing Roswell to Watergate. We are talking a secret that the President covered up at the cost of his job. And if that couldn't be concealed......how could Roswell? Again I ask: What secret of this magnitude has the government ever been able to conceal for decades? All I've heard so far is “secrets” that don't amount to a hill of beans.
Paul Young:
ReplyDelete"An ET event is a different kettle of fish. Something not just the US govt would want keeping quiet, but many others as well."
Sorry, but I do not follow your logic here. Are you saying that the US govt, plus some others, would try and suppress knowledge of the existence of intelligent ET life if they happened to discover it?
Is this supposed to be an example of scientific progress or of conspiracy theory? Some guys at the top of the US military get together and decide the scientific world cannot, in any circumstances, be told of this great discovery. Makes you wonder why astro-scientists and astronomers waste their time exploring the universe and searching for ET life at all.
Please name some other governments that would want to "keep this quiet". Far more likely that they would want to get in first and announce it to the world (after full verification of course).
cda...for years here on KR's blog you have separated the "scientific world" and the "top of the US military" as if the twain would never meet. You do realise top of the range scientists DO work within the military and intelligence community, don't you? And these guys would be bound by the same rigourous official secrets oaths as military/govt personnel. Do you really believe some government scientist working on a top secret programme ( like Manhattan Project)...would pop round Cambridge, etc, and lecture on it, keeping everyone abreast with the situation.
ReplyDeleteThe Manhattan Project had scientists leaking info to the Soviets. So much for the oaths.
ReplyDeleteThis is not to mention the fact that (contrary to popular belief) the fact the government was working on something of this magnitude did not escape the press. (In spite of the censorship of the time.) For example, a reporter for the Cleveland Press named John Raper got a story out called “Forbidden City Uncle Sam’s Mystery Town Directed by ‘2nd Einstein.’” in March 1944. After interviewing a lot of people in Santa Fe about Los Alamos, he figured out that it was being run by J. Robert Oppenheimer and speculated that they may be working on one big explosive (not too far from the truth).
Furthermore, speaking of scientists popping around around and lecturing on what they were doing......one guy in the Manhattan Project did exactly that. The president of the University of California (a manager of the Los Alamos Laboratory) made a speech during the war where he said he was working in a big secret lab on a weapon that could end the war quickly. (Which also wasn't too far from the truth.)
So lets stop kidding ourselves that a ET crash could be successfully covered up for 70 years. (And again: NO, these "leaks" we have seen on Roswell do not constitute real leaks because they haven't proved a thing.)
09RJA:
ReplyDelete"So lets stop kidding ourselves that a ET crash could be successfully covered up for 70 years. (And again: NO, these "leaks" we have seen on Roswell do not constitute real leaks because they haven't proved a thing.)".
The exact point I have been making for some time now. And of course it heavily relies on the US authorities hoping beyond hope that a UFO crash did not occur again, maybe in some other country. Now just think of the consequences if some other country got in first with the great "ET visit to Earth" revelation. Those guys in Washington could then announce that it had actually happened in the US first but "we couldn't tell the public because of top secret security restrictions".
That's ufology, folks.
To Kevin Randle:
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment Kevin, that certainly helps clear some things up. Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross.
To Brian Bell: Regarding your comment: But, I honestly can't explain why he couldn't find the information that I found related to the July 3, 1947 New Mexico experimental balloon flight. It may depend on the variation of the report he was using. If my memory serves me right, one of the reports I reviewed (I think it was a 300 pager), had the second table missing. It was the second table that contained the information he needed. I had to go through several variations of that document (300 and 1000 pagers) before I found one that had all of the pages I needed. I hope that helps. Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross . . .
ReplyDeleteTo Brian Bell: Regarding your following comment:
ReplyDeleteBut we have no actual documentation:
- That Goddard was test flighting satelloons on his rockets.
- That Satelloons were used in Mogul from 1947 through 1949 as a sub classified project of Echo 1.
- That Flight #4 ever flew.
You seem to indicate Flight #4 did fly and was....what?....intentionally not recorded because it contained a satelloon in the array?
As Kevin has stated, “Mogul Flight No. 4 was cancelled. It did not fly, there is no record of it anywhere and that number is skipped in the accounting.”
You seem to be on the right track in your Goddard Statement. I have a reliable New Mexico witness statement that indicated Goddard's Team was working on such projects at that time before leaving the area for jobs at White Sands. Two more witness leads to talk with there. Calls scheduled. Also documentation of a full-blown satelloon launch in New Mexico during spring of 1948. My research on the Kecksburg Case revealed nuclear experiment description intentionally not recorded on Corona Satellite launches when secret experiments were on board. . . Same protocol for balloons. . . Also, there is another Balloon Flight other than No. 4 that has no record of balloon formation, but the number is there as well as its fate. For now I'm holding that information close to my vest. . .
I believe I am on the right track and reason will fill in any gaps. Too close to ignore. I hope that stuff helps. Please be discrete. . . If you find the information above useful, please DO NOT Tell Kevin I gave it to you. . .Thanks . . . Dr.Bob Wenzel Gross . . .
The scientists working on the Manhattan project kept it quiet for as long as required. Ask the Japanese head of defence staff, 1945, if you don't believe me.
ReplyDeleteKevin Randle:
ReplyDeleteI initially tried to contact you via a FaceBook message with attachments on about September, 5, 2017. To date you have not responded to my message or the attachments. Next, on or about May 11, 2018, I posted a Roswell-related whitepaper report on the SCU Affiliates Private FaceBook Page for SCU Affilates. You are an SCU Affiliate. Remember? You never responded to my post.
On or about June 14, 2018, you posted a rant about me on your "A Different Perspective" blog. In your rant he wrote: “But the problem is that he [Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross] has ignored the other debris found there as described to me by Bill Brazel. Brazel said: “There was only three items involved. Something on the order of balsa wood and something on the order of heavy gauge monofilament fishing line and a little piece of… it wasn’t really aluminum foil and it wasn’t really lead foil but it was on that order.”
After re-reading your rant (and it really does read like a rant) I reviewed the June 12, 2018 YouTube Video interview that I recorded with Martin Willis. Mr. Willis conducted and controlled the interview. The video is: “Podcast UFO Live Stream 06/12/18, Dr. Bob Gross, Possible Kecksburg and Roswell Terrestrial Explanations.” At 1:15:04 into the video a photograph of the Roswell debris displayed in a Fort Worth, Texas office was shown. The debris was mostly “foil”. At 1:25:16 into the video “ropes” were discussed. At 1:31:30 into the video, the importance of combing the field for “scraps of materials” was discussed. At 1:32:40 into the video the fact that “experimental materials” were flown to Fort Worth, Texas was discussed. At 1:43:04 into the video the “I-Beams” discovered at the debris site were discussed.
Why did you lie? What else have you lied to your followers about? After all of the attacks you have made on my character lately, I believe I deserve a response. . . Thank you in advance for your cooperation and understanding . . . Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross . . .
CDA - you missed the earlier postings by 09RJA:
ReplyDelete1. "To say it hasn't been "hushed up" ignores the fundamental fact we are sitting here arguing about it. Is anyone debating if Watergate actually happened? Iran-Contra? Of course not."
2.“Mogul Flight No. 4 was cancelled. It did not fly, there is no record of it anywhere and that number is skipped in the accounting.”
Therefore, there is a coverup and we still don't know what really happened even after 70 years...
Regards
Nitram
Bob Gross -
ReplyDeleteI saw no posting to Facebook, but then, I rarely look at it. I find the whole Facebook thing to be somewhat intrusive and created the page to replace a fake one that someone had put up.
And, no, I haven't visited the SCU affiliates Facebook page either. So, while you attempted to make contact, I just never saw the messages.
Labeling this post as a rant doesn't make it one. I thought it was quite cordial, explaining why I was skeptical, but suggesting we withhold a final opinion until we see the evidence. You have to admit that you haven't really provided us with anything that wasn't already on the table and nothing to suggest that a satelloon was embeded in one of the Mogul arrays. And you initial responses didn't seem to suggest you were all that annoyed. I gave you, your website, and your appearance on Martin's program some publicity, linked to all that, and now it's a rant. Seriously?
So, now I'm a liar and I'm supposed to answer you. All I suggested that you didn't address the various types of material found on the Foster ranch and while you did mention the I-beams, you did not mention those other items I discussed. Should I now ask you why you lied? Is this really the best way to address all of this... Is this really a path you wish to follow?
I will note here that according to Dr. Crary's diary, Mogul Flight No. 4 was cancelled. There was a launch of a cluster of balloons later in the day, but the description of that cluster leaves no room for a satelloon. At this point, the documentation argues against the satelloon and Flight No. 4.
The Fort Worth photographs, all seven of them, show the degraded remains of a rawin radar reflector and the balloon envelop (that black pile of material off to the side). I have communicated with Irving Newton, who is in one of the photographs, and he identified it as a neoprene weather balloon and a rawin radar reflector. I have a video tape of retired Brigadier General Thomas DuBose, who is two of the photographs with General Ramey, who said that it was a weather balloon, but also said it was not the material brought from Roswell.
If you wish to continue in a cordial fashion, without the necessity of slinging mud, I'm willing. I'm waiting to see the evidence, but until that surfaces, I see nothing wrong with suggesting that we wait to make a final determination about the validity of your theory until then.
Kevin Randle:
ReplyDeleteOn or about June 29, 2018 you wrote: “I use the term Mogul for easy identification because, as Charles Moore said, this was a University of New York project.” I believe you are using the term “Mogul” incorrectly. You may want to go back and look at your research. Under a 1946 contract, New York University was commissioned to design, develop, and fly constant-level high-altitude balloons. Later, Project Mogul was given a top-secret classification with the highest priority. How old was Moore when you talked with him? There is no real institution in the United States that bears the exact name University of New York. Was he possibly referring to New York University?
Also, on or about June 29, 2018 you wrote: “My point is that I have no information on a Satelloon embedded in those flights and I do have diagrams of the arrays as they were constructed for those flights”. Also, do you really have ALL of the diagrams of ALL of the “arrays?” If so, I think you may be using the term “array” incorrectly too. You might want to go back and re-do your research.
On or about June 29, 2018 you also wrote: “Moore, among others, they mentioned nothing about satelloons, or other equipment for other experiments being tied in with theirs.” Your statement seems to be wrong or at least inaccurate according to my research. You may want to consider doing your research again or perhaps re-writing your sentence.
In addition, on or about June 14, 2018 you stated: “The real problem with this theory is that I can find nothing to support the idea that the testing was going on in New Mexico in 1947.” “No, the problem is that all the information that I have been able to find does not put any of these strange balloons in New Mexico in 1947.” Are you now changing your mind? Could you please restate your current position on strange balloons in New Mexico during 1947.
Thank you in advance for your time and consideration . . . Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross . . . .
Hello Kevin: I very much would like to communicate with you on a cordial professional manner.
ReplyDeleteI'm willing if you are . . . Also thanks for the publicity. Hey, at least we are finally communicating. You made my day! I did what I had to do to get your attention. If I offended you in anyway, I apologize . . . Bob . ..
"The scientists working on the Manhattan project kept it quiet for as long as required. Ask the Japanese head of defence staff, 1945, if you don't believe me."~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteI posted evidence to the contrary. Ask the Soviets how quiet it was kept.
Bob Gross -
ReplyDeleteThat was my mistake, not Moore's. The documentation all says, New York University. It is what Moore said.
I have seen nothing that puts a satelloon in a position to deposit debris on the Foster ranch. I said that we need to wait to see what evidence you have to the contrary. I have not seen that evidence and I have seen nothing that puts a satelloon in a Mogul array... and the June 4, 1947 (the only flight in the proper time frame that could have scattered the debris) was cancelled according to Dr. Crary's records. There was a cluster flight of balloons later on June 4, but there is no indication that it carried a satelloon either.
@Nitram Ang, your (7/4 @5:22 PM) post doesn't make much sense. (I didn't even say #2.)
ReplyDeleteKevin Randle:
ReplyDeleteOn or about June 14, 2018, you posted false statements about me on your "A Different Perspective" blog. One false statement was: “But the problem is that he has ignored the other debris found there as described to me by Bill Brazel.” Another false statement was: “That testimony seems to have escaped his research.”
I demand that you either remove or correct and change those statements on your blog within forty-eight (48) hours. If you have not removed those statements, I will proceed with filing a formal complaint against you with Google. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and understanding. . . . Dr. Bob Wenzel Gross . . .
09rja (yet another anonymous poster)...
ReplyDeleteThe point is that a secret, can be kept a secret, as long as a secret needs to be kept, depending on the political will.
I mentioned it here, a good long time ago, on this very blog, that files concerning Whitechapel Murders are still under lock and key and the authorities won't even discuss the reasons WHY they are being kept secret 130 years after the events.
Bugger me, you Yanks are total amateurs at the art of covering things up...UK authorities are past masters at it.
Hence I mentioned earlier in this thread...UK authorities must have watched the shambles of the Roswell cover-up and laughed their bollocks off. Our events? (Rendlesham, etc)...they simply refuse to even discuss the subject with us. Why bother the "little people's" minds with such horrid news?
09rja wrote:
ReplyDeleteYou are correct of course - my mistake. Perhaps you can help me? Do you agree with the statement made by Kevin and quoted by others...
"Mogul Flight No. 4 was cancelled. It did not fly, there is no record of it anywhere and that number is skipped in the accounting.”
Thank you for your time.
What I’m wanting to see is documentation that clearly establishes satelloons were being tested at the very same time as the Roswell incident in exactly the same locale.
ReplyDeleteBy documentation I’m referring to official papers signed by someone on official letterhead that clearly establishes the source of the info. University papers, research notes, government contracts, authorization for scientific testing, lab results and summary analysis, etc.
Without this, even if this is the solution, it will never be accepted as the explanation. Just theory. Plausible, but not provable.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBob Gross -
ReplyDeleteAs an affiliate of SCU, surely you must have my email address. Is there a reason that you have not used that as a way to continue this discussion? Do we really need to resort to threats? How cordial is that?
@Paul Young: No, a secret can't be kept "as long as a secret needs to be kept, depending on the political will". As I have stated elsewhere in this thread: What secret of this magnitude has the government ever been able to conceal for decades? Nothing I can think of. Concealing documents prove nothing. Again (as I have stated elsewhere in this thread): when UFO groups have won FOIA lawsuits.....the documents they got....what did they prove? Zilch. Nada. Nothing.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to the Whitechapel murders.....remember all those documents that supposedly were William Gull's that surfaced in the 1970's? They implicated Duke of Clarence. And guess what? He's got a airtight alibi for the nights in question. And I doubt Gull had a thing to do with it either as he was in poor health at the time. So eliminating the famous suspects.....what Earth shattering thing would these (supposedly concealed) documents likely prove? Sounds like nothing.
By the way, what is with the "anonymous poster" comment? Why exactly would you need to know my name for a blog discussion on a UFO crash?
@Nitram Ang: The Mogul flight was (according to the paperwork) cancelled. Ok, so what? We aren't talking a Apollo flight here. Possibly they screwed up the paperwork or possibly it was another Mogul flight.....or maybe it was a weather balloon. But there is nothing, nothing at all, to make me think this was a ET spacecraft.
Dr. Wenzel:
ReplyDeleteYour hostility seems odd to me. Disagreements happen all the time in this subject. Quotes and misquotes are common too.
What’s the problem here? I’ve been attacked more than once here — perhaps a hundred times — I certainly don’t ask for those comments to be deleted. I mean, who really cares?
Your irritability is concerning — makes me think your credibility is too much of a personal concern. Not that credibility isn’t important, but your demand smacks of arrogance? Child like behavior? I don’t know...but something is “off” with this threat....odd.
09rja (anon)..
ReplyDeleteyes, I know that elsewhere on this thread you said that no secrets can be kept...and laughingly you used Watergate as an example. I mean, the (domestic) event of the sacking of a Prez who only had a few years left to serve anyway..YEP..that's comparable to the event,(which would be of world-wide interest) of disclosure of aliens visiting us with impunity. Chuckle..it's too funny.
As for the Whitechapel Murders, you've totally gone on some tangent about some info that surfaced in the 1970's and totally ignored what I said.
Official documents are under lock and key. "Ripperologists" have been trying to get them opened for decades using FOIA and been refused. For whatever reason, the authorities must think there is a reason to keep something about the case secret...so It's kept secret. 130 years after the event.
UFOLOGIST's will tell you that the FOIA is only of minimal help to them and they have been obstructed on certain issues as a matter of routine and on some subjects been refused point blank.
Depending on the POLITICAL WILL, a secret can be kept secret. Rumours cant be suppressed but the truth can.
@Paul Young: So if I am wrong.....where is your example of some pivotal, game changing event that has been concealed for decades? The answer is: it's nowhere because it doesn't exist.
ReplyDeleteNothing wrong with the Watergate example. Here you have a President who failed in a cover up and leaks blew the case open. We have yet to see that with Roswell.
You brought up the Whitechapel murders....so it's your tangent. Furthermore, Scotland Yard has explained why they don't want to release the documents: because they don't want to reveal the identity of informants and compromise the ability to recruit future informants. Obviously all the informants in the Ripper case are dead....but it could still play as: the cops leaked names. Furthermore, they have released samples of the "secret" documents (with informants blacked out).....and they prove/change nothing with regards to the case.
It's that way with a lot of "secret" documents. Agencies are always hesitant to reveal methods, names, the fact they are watching whomever, embarrassing stuff, etc. Probably one of the best examples of that is JFK's assassination. After all the screaming about "release the documents" over the years.....what have conspiracy theorists gotten? A lot of stuff about the CIA working with the mob, spying on domestic groups, etc, etc......stuff that is embarrassing for them.....but no proof that changes anything on the assassination.
09rja wrote:
ReplyDelete"or maybe it was a weather balloon. But there is nothing, nothing at all, to make me think this was a ET spacecraft."
None of the witnesses reported what they saw/handled as being a weather balloon. Therefore "there is nothing, nothing at all, to make me think this was a mogul balloon train"
CDA, Paul Young is correct - Official documents are under lock and key. Depending on the POLITICAL WILL, a secret can be kept secret. Rumours cant be suppressed but the truth can.
Regards
Nitram
"None of the witnesses reported what they saw/handled as being a weather balloon."~Nitram Ang
ReplyDelete------------
I'd recheck that statement. Irving Newton saw the stuff first hand and he said point-blank it was a balloon (and a Rawin target). Sheridan Cavitt also described material consistent with a balloon. Several others described glue covered balsa wood as being part of the debris. I'm not sure what to tell you if you think a alien spacecraft would be made of balsa wood.
09rja (anon)
ReplyDeleteBut you said NOTHING can be kept secret for 70 odd years (or at least cda did) and I have given you an example...The files kept secret over the Whitechapel Murders.
Doesn't matter that interested parties want to see these files...they can't... their not allowed...why?...because some invisible person(s) have decided and political will enforces it... That's why.
And when people demand to know why...they get fobbed off with some ridiculous excuse. To use the Whitechapel Murders case as an example again (and I'll just quote your own words.) "...Scotland Yard has explained why they don't want to release the documents: because they don't want to reveal the identity of informants and compromise the ability to recruit future informants."
Seriously...what kind of half-arsed excuse is that for a murder case 130 years old? (Strewth...the govt must love people like you who are so easily fobbed off.)
And how can you even challenge that excuse when you can't look at the files to check the excuse is valid? You can't! It's a secret. A "catch 22"
(As an aside, I expect it's FA to do with the informants...more to do with the name the informants gave to the investigators.)
09rsa... "It's that way with a lot of "secret" documents. Agencies are always hesitant to reveal methods, names, the fact they are watching whomever, embarrassing stuff, etc. Probably one of the best examples of that is JFK's assassination. After all the screaming about "release the documents" over the years.....what have conspiracy theorists gotten? A lot of stuff about the CIA working with the mob, spying on domestic groups, etc, etc......stuff that is embarrassing for them.....but no proof that changes anything on the assassination.
You do realise that your above statement absolutely backs up my statement that secrets CAN be kept secret so long as the political will prevails.
BTW... "Watergate!" ... chuckle
"But you said NOTHING can be kept secret for 70 odd years (or at least cda did)..."~Paul Young
ReplyDelete-------
No, that isn't what I said. I said: "What secret of this magnitude has the government ever been able to conceal for decades?" [Emphasis added]
And so far, I haven't heard one thing. Just a lot of stuff about what might be concealed. And that's not good enough.
"Seriously...what kind of half-arsed excuse is that for a murder case 130 years old?"~Paul Young
I tell you one thing.....it certainly says (at least to me) that if you are a informant for Scotland Yard, your name will always be confidential. (When they say always, they truly mean always.) In any case, there are probably a lot of other reasons for this. For one thing the descendants of the informants could be hounded by the tabloid press over there. (The British tabloids are fairly notorious.)
Institutional embarrassment is another one. As a example, our own CIA has been reluctant to talk about things that go back to day one of it's existence (more than 70 years). Stuff like collaborating with Nazis and so on. On the Ripper murders, there are probably a good number of foul ups they aren't to excited to reveal.
Furthermore, as I said, they have released samples of the "secret" documents (with informants blacked out).....and they prove/change nothing with regards to the case.
Unless you want to say they are concealing a famous person being connected with the murders or something of that significance....you are pretty much conceding that I am right. "Release the documents!" just doesn't cut it as a argument. It's just how large organizations operate.
"You do realise that your above statement absolutely backs up my statement that secrets CAN be kept secret so long as the political will prevails."~Paul Young
No. As I said, we are talking concealing something significant......embarrassing stuff, dirty games, and so forth doesn't mean anything. ETs on the other hand.....
09rja wrote:
ReplyDelete"I'd recheck that statement. Irving Newton saw the stuff first hand and he said point-blank it was a balloon (and a Rawin target). Sheridan Cavitt also described material consistent with a balloon. Several others described glue covered balsa wood as being part of the debris. I'm not sure what to tell you if you think a alien spacecraft would be made of balsa wood."
Irving Newton never saw the stuff that was found on the ranch - he only saw the stuff displayed in Ramey's office which is not necessarily the same thing...
As for Cavitt, he of course recognized the stuff as tin foil and balsa wood but forgot to tell Marcel at the time who simply wasn't up to this.
I don't believe in the ET explanation but this balloon nonsense makes no sense either!
I wonder if you have seen the movie "Incident at Roswell"?
Have you even been to Roswell or interviewed any of the eye-witnesses?
But, my anonymous friend...you jumped in on cda's argument that nothing can be kept secret for 70 years, so I have to think, you think, the same thing.
ReplyDeleteTherefore I gave you an example of how a secret can be kept for 130 years.
And which ever way you want to wriggle out of it, the fact remains that no one can look at those files for no other reason than it's secret. Not for you, or me, or anyone to look at. And if you don't believe me, file an FOIA and demand to see them. (good luck with that, BTW)
.......
You say you've only heard from me about what might be concealed.
Don't you see...that's exactly the point.
We don't know what's being concealed because it's secret.
You can't even find out if you have been given a legitimate reason. You have to take the word of someone (we don't even know who that "someone" is anymore) who said it's to do with protecting some informant who has probably been dead 100 years. Yeah! OK! But it's just as likely that the file holds positive proof of who Jack the Ripper was...but we'll just have to believe what we are being told...because it's a secret file. A secret file successfully kept out of the bounds of many interested parties for more than a century.
...........
Anonymous... "No. As I said, we are talking concealing something significant..."
Sorry. I didn't realise that you were making the rules about what I was talking about when I answered cda's post.
Now look up the word "secret" because you plainly don't understand what it means...and report back to me.
09rja -
ReplyDeletePlease point me to the witnesses who talked about the glue covered balsa. I know that this was an idea floated by Karl Pflock, who suggested that it would strengthen the balsa, but I don't remember a first-hand witness who mentioned it.
And let's not forget that when Marcel was shown the pictures of the debris in Moore's book, he said that it wasn't the stuff he'd brought from Roswell... and no, we don't have to get into another argument about he was protecting the myth and had learned his lines. We all know that is the fall back position here.....
"Irving Newton never saw the stuff that was found on the ranch - he only saw the stuff displayed in Ramey's office which is not necessarily the same thing..."~Nitram Ang
ReplyDelete-------------------
According to the Roswell advocates it was.....that is, before it was supposedly switched. Despite Marcel's claim that some material was switched in some photos....a simple visual inspection makes clear: it's the same stuff in ALL photos.
I wonder if you have seen the movie "Incident at Roswell"?
Have you even been to Roswell or interviewed any of the eye-witnesses?~Nitram Ang
-----------------
This is one of the weakest tactics by UFO advocates I've seen.....without naming names.....I've seen it several times. The answer to the first question is "yes" ....the second is "no".
Tell me: why would I personally have to interview any of the Roswell eyewitnesses (many of whom are dead at this point) to realize many of them simply aren't telling the truth? Did you believe (for example) Jim Ragsdale? If the answer to that is "no".....how can you say that if you didn't interview him? Oh you don't believe he pulled the gold helmets off dead aliens? Doesn't count. You didn't interview him. Silly.
"Sorry. I didn't realise that you were making the rules about what I was talking about when I answered cda's post. "
ReplyDelete----------
Your post was addressed to me....and clearly you didn't get I am not talking about some meaningless secret.
As far as the Whitechappel murders go.....unless you want to say that the concealed documents hold the identity of the murderer....and that identity is someone famous/significant.....you are stuck with what I said: such a concealment likely means nothing.
By the logic of "they have concealed documents!" we could say everything from the moon landing was faked to the CIA killed Kennedy over MJ-12. For people who have read/studied such things: we know better. Conspiracy theorists tend to stay confined to their narrow areas of interest and ergo can't place anything in context. (Although you'd think all the FOIA lawsuits over UFOs would make this apparent.)
Lance - before you get excited, and start calling people names - the fact that what crashed (yes crashed) was NOT mogul doesn't mean the default position is alien.
ReplyDeleteNo, it simply means we have no plausible explanation for what Marcel and company held in the hands on the Foster ranch...
"Please point me to the witnesses who talked about the glue covered balsa. I know that this was an idea floated by Karl Pflock, who suggested that it would strengthen the balsa, but I don't remember a first-hand witness who mentioned it.~KRandle
ReplyDelete-------------------
Bill Brazel Jr. (in Berlitz & Moore's 'The Roswell Incident') described "some wooden-like particles I picked up. These were like balsa wood in weight, but a bit darker in color and much harder....yet you couldn't scratch it with your fingernail like ordinary balsa, and you couldn't break it either."
Interestingly enough, that fits the description of material Dr. Charles Moore says he was using on Mogul (including the fact he said some of the material was dipped in glue).
If anyone wants to believe that a real extraterrestrial space craft would be composed of "wooden-like particles"....I can't stop them. But I would think that would be highly unlikely. Then again, I'm not sure how far to trust Brazel Jr. anyway since (like a lot of Roswell eyewitnesses) his story changed over time.
And let's not forget that when Marcel was shown the pictures of the debris in Moore's book, he said that it wasn't the stuff he'd brought from Roswell... and no, we don't have to get into another argument about he was protecting the myth and had learned his lines. We all know that is the fall back position here.....~KRandle
--------
The only person saying that stuff was switched was Marcel. And you yourself have acknowledged (in the past) he had a tendency to exaggerate things at times. Looking at those photos, it's clear that material was never switched.
Anonymous "Your post was addressed to me....and clearly you didn't get I am not talking about some meaningless secret."
ReplyDeleteNope...it was for cda...but more importantly,who are you to decide which locked away secrets are meaningless and which ones are important?
AND if they are meaningless then why are they still secret?
Anonymous..."As far as the Whitechappel murders go.....unless you want to say that the concealed documents hold the identity of the murderer....and that identity is someone famous/significant.....you are stuck with what I said: such a concealment likely means nothing."
Once again you fight my argument for me. The files may well tell us the name. But we aren't allowed to see them because they have been locked away (kept secret, successfully for MORE than 70 years)
"The only person saying that stuff was switched was Marcel. And you yourself have acknowledged (in the past) he had a tendency to exaggerate things at times. Looking at those photos, it's clear that material was never switched."
ReplyDeleteMarcel was the only person on the debris field who was also, later in Ramey's office.
Accordingly he was the only person who could have said the stuff was switched.
This doesn't prove anything ET - if the stuff was not switched then the case is closed - what was recovered was a weather balloon and we have proof of "drooling idiot" theory.
"Nope...it was for cda.~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteNo it wasn't. Your exact statement:
09rja (anon)
But you said NOTHING can be kept secret for 70 odd years (or at least cda did)...
"AND if they are meaningless then why are they still secret?~Paul Young
I think I've already explained that one. (About every way I know how.)
So no more dancing around it: what exactly do you think is concealed in these documents? "I don't know" is not an acceptable answer.
Marcel was the only person on the debris field who was also, later in Ramey's office.
ReplyDeleteAccordingly he was the only person who could have said the stuff was switched.~Nitram Ang
Yeah only one problem: Marcel said in interviews that some of the REAL stuff was photographed. (Before it was switched.) I've seen every one of those photographs....and it all looks the same to me. (And certainly nothing extraterrestrial.)
So this "switched" stuff is likely another Marcel fabrication.
Time to leave this blog and continue the debate on the more recent one entitled "Jesse Marcel's Journal".
ReplyDeleteTime to leave this blog and continue the debate on the more recent one entitled "Jesse Marcel's Journal".
ReplyDelete09rja wrote:
ReplyDelete"Yeah only one problem: Marcel said in interviews that some of the REAL stuff was photographed. (Before it was switched.) I've seen every one of those photographs....and it all looks the same to me. (And certainly nothing extraterrestrial.)"
I agree with you 100% some of Marcel's testimony is contradictory to say the least.
Accordingly I have trouble with his testimony but also agree it's hard to imagine that he would have trouble identifying ordinary junk from a flying saucer (what I mean by that Lance, is something that isn't recognisable).
I am "skeptic" of the mogul explanation - why would Cavitt continually lie about his involvement if what was recovered was just a weather balloon? He said in interviews that he wasn't even there - yet the "believers" (Lance/CDA) never question HIS testimony... because it fits their view...
Oh and CDA - you still don't get it - this is not a debate but an investigation - please write it on your wall at home.
Anonymous...Not that it matters, but you can't even get the "who was speaking to whom" right.
ReplyDelete(I refer you to my post, here. June 27, 2018 at 9:42)
I'm sorry that my talking to cda, and not you, made you feel neglected.
No "dancing around" but cda said "nothing" can be kept secret for 70 years. I showed an example of when (if the political will is there) something can be kept secret for 130 odd years...and counting.
...and I don't know what is kept in those files. I'd love to know but I'm not allowed to. They are secret. (Have been for 70 year...plus 60.)
.............
cda said...
"Time to leave this blog and continue the debate on the more recent one entitled "Jesse Marcel's Journal".
(may I emphasise that I'm talking to cda here and not that anonymous chap)
Time for you maybe, cda...but you know how much I enjoy torturing a point :-)
"(I refer you to my post, here. June 27, 2018 at 9:42)"~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteAnd I refer you to your own post @ July 10, 2018 at 4:06 PM. Clearly addressed to me....whether you are honest enough to admit it or not.
No "dancing around" but cda said "nothing" can be kept secret for 70 years. I showed an example of when (if the political will is there) something can be kept secret for 130 odd years...and counting.
...and I don't know what is kept in those files. I'd love to know but I'm not allowed to. They are secret. (Have been for 70 year...plus 60.)~Paul Young
So you don't know what is being concealed but somehow it proves your point? Sorry. Not good enough. The fact that the Roswell advocates cannot name a single thing of this magnitude that has been concealed for a similar length of time I think tells any objective person all they need to know.
Equally suspicious is the fact this is unmentioned in any foreign Intel archive. The KGB archives say nothing on this. Not one legit KGB defector even hinted that they were aware of such a thing. Such a discovery would have undoubtedly resulted in a massive reverse engineering project......yet the KGB didn't penetrate it (like they did the Manhattan Project)? Preposterous.
Of course it proves the point. If it hadn't been successfully kept secret, (for about 130 years) then we'd all know what was in the files.
ReplyDelete...as for Manhattan Project or Tube Alloys, both were kept secret for as long as needed and were an absolute resounding success.
ReplyDeleteI'd say it's a bit pointless keeping quiet about an atom bomb AFTER you've dropped two or three of the rascals.
They're not exactly inconspicuous little things, are they!
Of course it proves the point. If it hadn't been successfully kept secret, (for about 130 years) then we'd all know what was in the files.
ReplyDelete.......
...as for Manhattan Project or Tube Alloys, both were kept secret for as long as needed and were an absolute resounding success.
I'd say it's a bit pointless keeping quiet about an atom bomb AFTER you've dropped two or three of the rascals.~Paul Young
---------
Apparently you are still struggling with the concept of significance.....and since I have not heard one thing named of this magnitude that was covered up for this length of time.....you are correct that the point is made. (Just not the point you are willing to accept/concede.)
And it is ridiculous to say the Manhattan Project (or) the Tube Alloys were "kept secret" since both were penetrated by Soviet Intel years before the war ended. (As I have already stated and is easily verifiable.)
Hello Paul
ReplyDeleteThank you for all your posts... You have an excellent writing style and way with words.
Like you I find the idea, that keeping a secret for over 130 years is possible.
Of course there are a minority of people in Britain who maintain an ET secret has a limited time frame of just two weeks, anything else of course can be kept secret for centuries...
The following classic from 09rja is similar in style to CDA's writings...
"The fact that the Roswell advocates cannot name a single thing of this magnitude that has been concealed for a similar length of time I think tells any objective person all they need to know."
Well for one, assuming that Roswell is ET, I can't think of anything of such magnitude in earth's history, secret or not, with the sole exception of the birth of Christ some 2000 years ago...
"Well for one, assuming that Roswell is ET, I can't think of anything of such magnitude in earth's history, secret or not, with the sole exception of the birth of Christ some 2000 years ago..."~Nitram Ang
ReplyDelete--------
I'd put the Manhattan Project in that category. Granted ETs would certainly be bigger....but in terms of magnitude, the Manhattan Project is in the ballpark. And how long did it take the Soviets to penetrate it? They were in it from just about day one. Not sure how many more times I'm going to have to say this before it sinks in.
Anonymous...When you interrupted my chat with cda (June 27th, 09:42), you mustn't have noticed that nothing was mentioned about what was considered "significant", or not. Though the need for a secret to be kept filed away for 130 odd years suggests rather high "significance"
ReplyDeleteAnd as previously mentioned, who are you to say what is, and is not, significant?
....
Thankyou Nitram (where should I post the cheque to? :-)
09rja wrote"
ReplyDelete"I'd put the Manhattan Project in that category."
That is your opinion only - in my view it doesn't come close to an ET visitation of our planet...
Be mildly interesting to hear what CDA considers "significant" to be...
That is your opinion only - in my view it doesn't come close to an ET visitation of our planet...~Nitram Ang
ReplyDeleteAnd that is your opinion. I think most people (with sense) would agree with me. The Manhattan Project was a complete game changer: it changed warfare, global politics, energy generation, set us on the path for (hopefully) eventual commercial nuclear fusion power (which will ultimately fix the energy and global warming issues, two of the biggest issues we face), etc, etc.
The effects of the Manhattan Project will be felt (likely) for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Outside of ETs, it doesn't get much bigger than that.
And was it concealed? Nope.
It was concealed long enough to be an absolute success for what its purpose was...
ReplyDeleteThat was to get an atomic bomb working before anyone else could. Don't forget Germany and USSR were also trying to make an atom bomb as early as UK were working on one through Tube Alloys.
It was no secret that America would be trying to develop one.
Considering every other man and his dog was trying to make one...they'd be mad not to.
It was concealed long enough to be an absolute success for what its purpose was...~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteIncredible someone would say this considering the facts I have presented (i.e. it was not concealed and this Top Secret project was infiltrated by foreign Intel).
But I'm glad you have said it because this really shows the inability of believers on this topic to think critically.
09rja wrote:
ReplyDelete"I think most people (with sense) would agree with me."
Really? - I will have to ask some of the intelligent people in my building if they would consider the Manhattan project to be as important moment in history as an ET visitation...
Will get back to you with the results!
Kevin, David and Lance - you all have sense so can you give us your thoughts on whether you would side with 09rja or me on this one please...
Regards
Nitram
Hello all
ReplyDeleteEarly days with the survey in my building 09rja, but the results aren't looking good for you.
Of course you should also re read Paul's post earlier:
"I'd say it's a bit pointless keeping quiet about an atom bomb AFTER you've dropped two or three of the rascals. They're not exactly inconspicuous little things, are they!"
If an ET craft landed on the White House lawn, then you and CDA would have proof that you can't keep an ET secret forever...
Anonymous..."Incredible someone would say this considering the facts I have presented (i.e. it was not concealed and this Top Secret project was infiltrated by foreign Intel)."
ReplyDeleteIf the "foreign intel" was as effective as you seem to believe, one has to wonder why it took USSR 8 years, AFTER WW2 had ended, to build one themselves.
Probably because the wrong "Intel" was purposely leaked.
It's called "counter intelligence" for a reason, darling.
...correction...I meant "3 years", not 8.
ReplyDeleteReally? - I will have to ask some of the intelligent people in my building if they would consider the Manhattan project to be as important moment in history as an ET visitation...~ Nitram Ang
ReplyDeleteNot reading what I am saying are you? I didn't say it was as "important moment in history as an ET visitation".....I said: ETs would certainly be bigger....but in terms of magnitude, the Manhattan Project is in the ballpark.
And there isn't too much in our world the Manhattan Project didn't change. (As I have noted.)
By the way, I couldn't pass this up:
ReplyDeleteReally? - I will have to ask some of the intelligent people in my building if they would consider the Manhattan project to be as important moment in history as an ET visitation...~Nitram Ang (@ July 19, 2018 at 6:10 PM)
[next post]
Early days with the survey in my building 09rja, but the results aren't looking good for you.~Nitram Ang (@July 19, 2018 at 6:19 PM)
"Early days" indeed: we are talking a 9 minute survey here. (Minus the time to write that second post.) A lot of people in your "building" must be sitting right next to you.
If the "foreign intel" was as effective as you seem to believe, one has to wonder why it took USSR 8 years, AFTER WW2 had ended, to build one themselves.
ReplyDeleteProbably because the wrong "Intel" was purposely leaked.
It's called "counter intelligence" for a reason, darling.~Paul Young
You are saying the leaks (for which several spies were imprisoned and executed over was counterintelligence?! I don't think even you believe that. Why not just admit you are wrong on this and just let it go? It's almost universally agreed that the spies supplied them with information that saved them years of research. (Keeping them from making the same wrong turns that happened in the Manhattan Project.)
Why would anyone wonder (by the way) why the Soviets (who were technologically behind pretty much every other first world nation) would take longer than the USA to develop a bomb?
In any case the point still stands: the Soviets knew of the project (before it was public and supposedly secret), it's purpose, and had a pipeline into the research. If your ego will not let you admit you are wrong.....that's ok.
Anonymous..."You are saying the leaks (for which several spies were imprisoned and executed over was counterintelligence?"
ReplyDeleteNot that they were counter-intelligence agents, but that they were fed info from counter-intelligence.
Do you think the American's were stupid enough to believe that NO spies would be hanging around the project?
Compartmentalisation of the information was the name of the game...and the guys who organised Manhattan Project excelled at it.
Enabled the mission to be accomplished...ie, develop the bomb first...use it...end of war...end of Manhattan Project.
Sure, bits leaked from the Manhattan Project. If all the info the USSR agents were getting was pure.. then they might well have developed theirs in the same time frame as USA.
So obviously, it wasn't. (Counter-intelligence muddying the waters for them.)
Roswell leaked...Rendlesham leaked...(how else would we have heard about those events?)
But with the aid of counter-intelligence, the leaks were managed...and still are.(Helping to keep secrets secret...for 70 years...130 years...indefinitely.
...correction...I meant "3 years", not 8.
ReplyDeleteIt was actually 4. Try to get at least something right.
"Not that they were counter-intelligence agents, but that they were fed info from counter-intelligence."~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteAnd your proof of that is what exactly?
"Sure, bits leaked from the Manhattan Project."~Paul Young
Glad you finally admit that.
Roswell leaked...Rendlesham leaked...(how else would we have heard about those events?)~Paul Young
Leaks that prove nothing with regards to these events. We are still sitting here talking about IF Roswell actually involved a ET. Nobody is debating what the Manhattan Project involved. You admit that (you've already taken a important first step above) and you are on the road to sanity.
Yes, absolutely correct...and reinforces what a magnificent success the counter-intelligence used by Manhattan Project management was in order to ensure US got the bomb working first, despite knowing spies were amongst them.
ReplyDelete09rja wrote
ReplyDelete"Early days" indeed: we are talking a 9 minute survey here. (Minus the time to write that second post.) A lot of people in your "building" must be sitting right next to you."
Yes, fortunate enough to work with many intelligent people close by.
I had however, only spoken with a handful of people and the general feeling was that ET visitation was up there with the second coming of Christ or proof of the existence of God.
They generally agreed that the Manhattan project was an important moment in human history but not nearly at the same level of those other possible events mentioned above.
For the sake of completeness I should add the many people considered that ET visitation had NOT happened yet.
But like I said "early days".
Suggest you ask a few people too 09rja...
Yes, absolutely correct...and reinforces what a magnificent success the counter-intelligence used by Manhattan Project management was in order to ensure US got the bomb working first, despite knowing spies were amongst them.~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteI'm still waiting for some proof on that claim (i.e. that the leaks in the Manhattan Project were counter-Intel).
The Manhattan Project was kept secret long enough for the mission to complete successfully.
ReplyDeleteCan't stop leaks...but can keep secrets. (for much, much longer than 70 years.)
Can't stop leaks...but can keep secrets.~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteThat's contradictory. And I take it (from that answer) you have no proof that the leaks in the Manhattan Project were a result of counter-Intel. (Which is what I suspected in the first place.)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSecrets can be kept for more than 70 years...as demonstrated.
ReplyDeleteSecrets can be kept for more than 70 years...as demonstrated.~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteYes....things that really don't mean a whole lot can be concealed for 70 years. The government possessing ET craft doesn't quite fall into that category.
If something doesn't "mean a whole lot" then why would it be kept secret for 70 plus years.
ReplyDelete"If something doesn't "mean a whole lot" then why would it be kept secret for 70 plus years."~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteFor about the 50th time: in many cases we are talking embarrassing stuff, concealing names, the fact the surveillance is happening, and so forth. In other words: stuff that is meaningless to the average person....but is important to them. Anyone who knows anything about Intel knows this.
How do you know what are in those files? They're secret.
ReplyDelete"How do you know what are in those files? They're secret."~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteI know there is nothing significant because (for about the 400th time) there has never been a case where something Earth-shattering (like this) has turned up in such files (concealed for decades). Not sure how many different ways to tell you this.
If you won't take my word for it.....how about Kevin's?
"Stan [Friedman] use to have a document that he finally got through FOIA and it had like pages and pages of everything blacked out and you'd see one word or a page number here and there and it was just absolutely worthless. We finally got the rest of the document and we understand now it had really nothing to do with UFOs, the reason it was classified is it talked about listening posts that were based in Turkey that were monitoring Soviet communications. So at the time it was a national security item."~Kevin Randle on the Martin Willis Show (7/17/18 at about the 1:36:25 mark)
That is what is typically in these "secret files".
Secret files are secret. Many of them successfully holding secrets for 70 years plus.
ReplyDeleteSecret files are secret. Many of them successfully holding secrets for 70 years plus.
ReplyDeleteMeaningless secrets (to the average person).
Still secret. And obviously "significant" otherwise they wouldn't be kept secret for so long.
ReplyDelete"And obviously "significant" otherwise they wouldn't be kept secret for so long."~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteSignificant to the people concealing it. To everyone else....not so much. To run with Kevin's example above: listening posts based in Turkey wouldn't even get a yawn out of the average person.
Why conceal for so long if the secret is insignificant.
ReplyDelete"Why conceal for so long if the secret is insignificant."~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteObviously you missed the part about "significant to the people concealing it". As explained numerous times before: the revelations (in the past) about (for example) such CIA excesses as working with the mob and domestic surveillance undermined the organization's credibility and ability to ask for funding. On Capital Hill that meant something...but to the average person? It meant pretty much nothing. Obviously not even in the same category as a crash of aliens.
So which point are you going to make next?
How do you know what are in those files? They're secret.
And obviously "significant" otherwise they wouldn't be kept secret for so long.
Why conceal for so long if the secret is insignificant.
Secrets can be kept for more than 70 years...as demonstrated.
I think I've answered some of those points about a half dozen times now.
If this is a case of you wanting the last word: forget it. I've got all the time in the world.
So why not summarize what you have been wrong about in this thread to kill the time?
1. You falsely claimed that the leaks in the Manhattan Project were counter Intel.
2. You falsely claimed that the Manhattan Project was successfully concealed (despite the program being completely infiltrated by the KGB from day one).
3. You cannot name a single thing of this magnitude that any government has successfully concealed.
4. You obviously have no clue about how Intel agencies work.
5. You obviously are not particularly well read about such cover ups/scandals.
I'm sure there is more....but that's the main stuff that comes to mind. :)
Anonymous..."So which point are you going to make next?
ReplyDeleteHow do you know what are in those files? They're secret.
And obviously "significant" otherwise they wouldn't be kept secret for so long.
Why conceal for so long if the secret is insignificant.
Secrets can be kept for more than 70 years...as demonstrated.
All four of them.
All four of them.~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteOk so lets help Paul out shall we (the slow kid in the class):
Secrets can be kept for more than 70 years...as demonstrated.
Yes, meaningless/insignificant secrets can be kept.
Why conceal for so long if the secret is insignificant.
Organizations like the CIA routinely hide things like that to conceal names, means of intelligence gathering, the fact they are gathering Intel in the first place and so on. In other cases they are covering up outright wrongdoing (like plotting with the mob to kill Castro or other embarrassing stuff). These things undermine their credibility and can make asking for funding more difficult. To the average person, it's meaningless.....on Capital Hill.....it makes things difficult. Obviously a crashed UFO doesn't quite fall into this category.
And obviously "significant" otherwise they wouldn't be kept secret for so long.
Significant to them.....to most everyone else....not so much (as explained). Some of the revelations of (for example) of the Church Committee got mostly yawns out of the average person. But for the CIA, it was a PR nightmare.
How do you know what are in those files? They're secret.
We have a track record to look at. Saying there is proof of some ET crash in a file out at Langley ignores what has happened to secrets anywhere near of this magnitude in the past: either it's leaked by a insider or discovered by foreign Intel. neither has happened with any of these "crashes". And no, none of the so-called leaks in this constitute real leaks because we are still debating if it happened. Nobody is debating if the Pentagon papers are real or if Iran-Contra actually happened.
Hopefully that makes things clear for you.
But if something was meaningless/insignificant...then they wouldn't be kept for 70 years or more...
ReplyDelete"But if something was meaningless/insignificant...then they wouldn't be kept for 70 years or more..."~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteObviously you missed the part about "significant to the people concealing it". As explained numerous times before: the revelations (in the past) about (for example) such CIA excesses as working with the mob and domestic surveillance undermined the organization's credibility and ability to ask for funding. On Capital Hill that meant something...but to the average person? It meant pretty much nothing. Obviously not even in the same category as a crash of aliens.
If it wasn't significant though...it wouldn't be kept secret.
ReplyDelete09rja/CDA
ReplyDelete"Yes....things that really don't mean a whole lot can be concealed for 70 years."
Madeleine McCann has now been missing for over ten years - it is a secret as to where she is. I'm sure there are many people in the world (not just her parents) that would like to know what happened to her...
Certainly not up there with the announcement of aliens, but great public interest nevertheless...
"If it wasn't significant though...it wouldn't be kept secret."~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteYou still seem to be struggling with the concept of "significant to the people concealing it". (For PR reasons.)
"Madeleine McCann has now been missing for over ten years - it is a secret as to where she is. I'm sure there are many people in the world (not just her parents) that would like to know what happened to her...
ReplyDeleteCertainly not up there with the announcement of aliens, but great public interest nevertheless..."~Nitram Ang
Since you yourself note this is not anywhere near in the category of aliens.....not sure why you would make this point in the first place. I doubt very seriously she was kidnapped by any government and a massive covert (decades long) research project is built around her either. (The only situation that would make this comparison worthwhile.)
Who decides What's "significant"
ReplyDelete"Who decides What's "significant""~Paul Young
ReplyDeletePeople with common sense. And anyone familiar with the historical record. This would exclude virtually every UFO buff I've ever met. :)
People like Randle and Vallee?
ReplyDelete"People like Randle and Vallee?"~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteNot everyone in the field....but the overwhelming majority.
Anonymous...So what is the bar for what is significant or not?
ReplyDelete09rja wrote:
ReplyDelete"This would exclude virtually every UFO buff I've ever met. :)"
To help us get a better handle on your level of experience can you please confirm which of the following people you have met:
Tom Carey
Stan Friedman
Karl Pflock
Kevin Randle
David Rudiak
Don Schmitt
not a complete list of course, but it's a start...)
Thank you.
Regards
Nitram
"Anonymous...So what is the bar for what is significant or not?"~Paul Young
ReplyDeleteSomething that impacts millions and is a real game changer. Stuff like the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, The Manhattan Project, and so on.
"To help us get a better handle on your level of experience can you please confirm which of the following people you have met:
ReplyDeleteTom Carey
Stan Friedman
Karl Pflock
Kevin Randle
David Rudiak
Don Schmitt
~Nitram Ang
I've spoken to a few of them. But their published works speak for themselves (far more than any short-term conversation could).....and frankly several of those guys have been taken for rides by con artists (like Frank Kaufmann, Jim Ragsdale, Glenn Dennis, etc, etc). They've also been fooled by phony documents like MJ-12. (Since this is Kevin's blog, I'll politely note that he wasn't).
So yeah, the track record in this field isn't good. Sorry to be blunt about it, but there it is.
Furthermore, the UFO believers obviously number more than the 6 people you name.....and I have known quite a few over the years. And almost all of them use the same specious logic I see here and from the more famous advocates.
Earlier 09rja stated:
ReplyDelete"This would exclude virtually every UFO buff I've ever met. :) "
Maybe I need to repeat the question for you 09rja:
To help us get a better handle on your level of experience can you please confirm which of the following people you have "met" (not just spoken with over the phone):
Tom Carey
Stan Friedman
Karl Pflock
Kevin Randle
David Rudiak
Don Schmitt
Reading between the lines I'm guessing that you haven't met any of them?
Where does it say that a significant event has to "impacts millions and is a real game changer"?
ReplyDeleteBut running with your definition...
The Crimean War had an impact on millions of people. And we know files from that conflict have been kept secret for 130 odd years. :-)
"But running with your definition...
ReplyDeleteThe Crimean War had an impact on millions of people. And we know files from that conflict have been kept secret for 130 odd years."~Paul Young
The Crimean War is your idea of a game changer (especially at this point)? (You are forgetting that part of my criteria.)
"Reading between the lines I'm guessing that you haven't met any of them?"~Nitram Ang
ReplyDeleteAnd (as usual) you are wrong. I have met 2 of them. But again I ask: why exactly would any short term conversation with any of them outweigh their published works? Explain the logic of that to me.
Furthermore, are you saying these 6 people represent the entire field? I had no idea the UFO field was that small. Obviously the "virtually every UFO buff" comment was referring to the average, rank and file person I've met over the years.
But this is how you people think. This is the logic in this field. Recall earlier in this thread you asked me had I "been to Roswell or interviewed any of the eye-witnesses?". Forgetting about the fact most of the first hand witnesses are dead......since their published testimony is on the record, why exactly would anyone have to personally interview them to assess their credibility?
Like I asked you before (and you never responded): Do/did you (for example) believe Jim Ragsdale? If the answer to that is "no".....how can you say that if you didn't interview him? Oh you don't believe he pulled the gold helmets off dead aliens? Doesn't count. You didn't interview him.
This is what passes as "logic" in this field.
09rja wrote:
ReplyDelete"And (as usual) you are wrong. I have met 2 of them. But again I ask: why exactly would any short term conversation with any of them outweigh their published works? Explain the logic of that to me."
Based on the limited info you provided it was a fair guess that you hadn't met any of them. But really (as usual) you are missing the point of the question which you are not properly answering anyway...
So the question was (asked again for a third time) :
"please confirm which of the following people you have met"...
Your answer "two" is simply a number of people and doesn't answer the question.
To answer the question you need to name those two people...
Further questions may come from your answer... we have to do this a rather slow way because you have trouble answering simple questions.
You then stated:
"are you saying these 6 people represent the entire field? I had no idea the UFO field was that small."
No, if you re-look at my post I said that this was "not a complete list of course, but it's a start...)"
You ask:
"Recall earlier in this thread you asked me had I "been to Roswell or interviewed any of the eye-witnesses?" - why exactly would anyone have to personally interview them to assess their credibility?"
I have no doubt it would help to interview the witnesses to get a "better understanding of the case" - much like interviewing the witnesses at a crime scene.
You seem to give the impression that if you had never played a game of chess in your life, simply picked up a set of rules and read those several pages out loud for a few minutes and then suddenly, based on your new found knowledge and "experience" would be ready to take on the World Chess Champion.
Getting excited you later wrote:
"Like I asked you before (and you never responded): Do/did you (for example) believe Jim Ragsdale? If the answer to that is "no".....how can you say that if you didn't interview him? Oh you don't believe he pulled the gold helmets off dead aliens? Doesn't count. You didn't interview him."
Well firstly I don't recall you specifically asking me that question - which is not to say you didn't - perhaps I didn't see your post.
To answer your question, no, I never interviewed Jim Ragsdale but I have met people who have and yes, I reject his testimony for a number of reasons.
Finally I would have to agree with Paul Young:
1. Where does it say "significant" has to impact millions "and" be a game changer
2. Secrets can be kept for more than 2 years (your pal CDA estimates at just two weeks).
Regards
Nitram
"To answer the question you need to name those two people..."~Nitram Ang
ReplyDeleteWhat possible difference would it make? But if you must know, it was Stan Friedman and (the late) Karl Pflock. (On separate occasions.)
"I have no doubt it would help to interview the witnesses to get a "better understanding of the case" - much like interviewing the witnesses at a crime scene.
You seem to give the impression that if you had never played a game of chess in your life, simply picked up a set of rules and read those several pages out loud for a few minutes and then suddenly, based on your new found knowledge and "experience" would be ready to take on the World Chess Champion."~Nitram Ang
One (REALLY big) problem with that analogy: this isn't my first time at the rodeo with this. I've been reading on this subject for decades. I don't have to personally interview eyewitnesses to know when I'm hearing some nonsense.
To put it simply: if I can debunk someone based on the interview a pro-ET Roswell person did.....there are some real issues. That leads us to.....
"Well firstly I don't recall you specifically asking me that question - which is not to say you didn't - perhaps I didn't see your post.
To answer your question, no, I never interviewed Jim Ragsdale but I have met people who have and yes, I reject his testimony for a number of reasons.~Nitram Ang
I went back and looked and the post is there.....and secondly: how can you say you don't believe Jim Ragsdale when you never met him? That's what your logic amounts to here.
This is really great stuff......the "logic" in this field is amazing sometimes.
Your "criteria" doesn't matter. What matters is that there is still the "political will" to keep secret events that happened 130 odd years ago in a conflict that affected millions of people. Like I said...Secrets CAN be kept secret, and are.
ReplyDeleteYeah, my criteria does matter. Still waiting on you to name a successfully concealed game changer.
ReplyDelete"Concealed" game changer. LOL, You prove my point, yet again. How would I, or anyone else, know what is in a concealed file.
ReplyDelete