tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post2433011066216846589..comments2024-03-18T16:51:50.688-07:00Comments on A Different Perspective: The Nuns Diaries and the Anatomy of an InvestigationKRandlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comBlogger77125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-75711141297226519942015-08-09T00:55:48.892-07:002015-08-09T00:55:48.892-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.William Strathmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01641055950393700958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-59402921176154417622015-08-07T11:03:30.534-07:002015-08-07T11:03:30.534-07:00Brian -
Are you simply being obtuse or do you jus...Brian -<br /><br />Are you simply being obtuse or do you just wish to create trouble where there should be none. The family of Saunders said the writing was his... The friends that he supplied the books to said that it was his. There is no doubt that it was Saunders who made the notations.<br /><br />And have you ever served in the military, or have you merely looked at some of the records? Did you know that the morning reports are filed in St. Louis but there are literally millions of them. They now charge for the privilege of searching them... and the results are often just another form letter. Twenty years ago it took 18 months to get the morning reports of the medical unit at Roswell and today the delays are even longer... not to mention that if a soldier was sent to Roswell on TDY, the notation might just give the name and "on TDY" without the base or location given.<br /><br />And, once again you have dragged a conversation out into the weeds for no real purpose that I can detect.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-64318727207802456742015-08-07T09:45:00.008-07:002015-08-07T09:45:00.008-07:00@ William
And we might add has that handwriting b...@ William<br /><br />And we might add has that handwriting been authenticated as Saunders? Might be trivial but again anyone can pen a few words in a book.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-61100563668606895372015-08-07T09:41:00.422-07:002015-08-07T09:41:00.422-07:00Kevin:
Leave requests - seen them. Flight records...Kevin:<br /><br />Leave requests - seen them. Flight records - yes. Trip tickets - no. I'm not the motor pool guy.<br /><br />And since the morning reports are simply the equivalent of a headcount audit, or paper roll call, and because they do show where a person was deployed, then where exacy are the morning reports from the other bases in NM? Do they substantiate and verify MP's and additional troops were detailed to Roswell? <br /><br />Clearly if the Roswell morning reports still exist then you have reviewed the reports from the surrounding bases as foundation for your claim they were deployed there. Right?<br /><br />Look, you state you have documentation, but in reply you reference only Berlitz and Moore's book with a few, very few, scribbled notations that might have come from anyone. As CDC mentioned, the man bought dozens of these books for friends and family to say "look I was there." Suanders was smart enough to know how records can be fudged, but that doesn't mean they were.<br /><br />You may consider my observation irrelevant, but IMO your conclusionsa are based on subjective info mainly based on the fact, as you stated, that Saunders was a competent officer. Looks like selective myopia to me.<br /><br />But if you say it happened that way and one guy"s testimony and scribbled words in a book about an alien crash is sufficient to chuck all other possible conclusions then so be it. The man has spoken. Case closed. Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-67507307617061378782015-08-07T01:19:09.251-07:002015-08-07T01:19:09.251-07:00b"h
Just curious Kevin if you might have ask...b"h<br /><br />Just curious Kevin if you might have asked whether or not Saunders typically added marginal notes to his books. If he did not usually add notes to books he read, then that would also suggest an extraordinary stimulus for him to add the notes, not to mention the very subject of the book in this case.William Strathmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01641055950393700958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-36501808016132063122015-08-06T21:26:34.211-07:002015-08-06T21:26:34.211-07:00Hello BB
I am surprised by some of your posts and...Hello BB<br /><br />I am surprised by some of your posts and even more surprised that some people are even replying (maybe their doing so as a courtesy?).<br /><br />We are getting even further off topic but perhaps you can tell us a little bit about your background please?<br /><br />Still, where would we be without a good laugh every now and again...Nitramhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09658903255370299035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-70562264778806652762015-08-06T19:07:24.066-07:002015-08-06T19:07:24.066-07:00Brian -
As usual, you assume way too much. I cite...Brian -<br /><br />As usual, you assume way too much. I cited Saunders as a single example, not the only example.<br /><br />Second, the documentation you wanted would have proved nothing. Have you ever filled out a military vehicle trip ticket? Seen flight records? TDY orders? You had mentioned the morning reports without understanding the meaning of them and that they were list the names of the soldiers whose status had changed, the reason for that change (on leave, on TDY, in the hospital, etc.) but not the duty assignment. That is why those orders are somewhat irrelevant... you would learn the soldier had been sent to the base, but not what he might do when he arrived. They certainly wouldn't say, "To assist in the recovery and clean up of an alien spacecraft."<br /><br />Your assumptions are repetitive, uninformed, and irrelevant. I have documentation from the base adjutant that you reduce to scribbled notes. Reject them if you wish, but your reasoning is flawed.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-47214580472204957272015-08-06T17:44:46.250-07:002015-08-06T17:44:46.250-07:00Kevin: On Saunders....
You can't control the ...Kevin: On Saunders....<br /><br />You can't control the flip of the coin whenever you want and maintain objectivity.<br /><br />You state: <br /><br />"Finally, I have testimony from the base adjutant about the steps taken to hide the information and how they altered records and the like... oh, wait, that is testimony was you'll reject it automatically as unreliable."<br /><br />First - In the past you have criticized others on this list for citing only ONE witness' testimony - and yet here you anchor all of your beliefs that a massive military cleanup took place to hide an alien crash because the man made odd notations in your book?<br /><br />Second - Your book states that military personnel were deployed from many bases, not just Roswell, and that Saunder's penned note confirms this? <br /><br />But then you brush off my request for documentation of deployment by saying it couldn't exist for Roswell personnel because it wouldn't be recorded, but then endorse other servicemen being deployed from other bases? Where's their documentation? <br /><br />Why then criticize other people on your blog who also can't provide documentation?<br /><br />I think this is a good example of a double standard that is intentionally trying to force an explanation that supports the ET hypothesis.<br /><br />One witness...no documentation...your books....scribbled notes.... Really?<br />Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-35380754583576601762015-08-06T05:26:42.844-07:002015-08-06T05:26:42.844-07:00b"h
Just did a little searching for the adju...b"h<br /><br />Just did a little searching for the adjutant.<br /><br />http://kevinrandle.blogspot.co.il/2009/03/roswell-ufo-crash-and-patrick-saunders.htmlWilliam Strathmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01641055950393700958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-82135926071129193932015-08-06T01:51:44.611-07:002015-08-06T01:51:44.611-07:00b"h
My apologies Kevin for bringing up eithe...b"h<br /><br />My apologies Kevin for bringing up either Cooper's remarks about chain of command or Blanchard's service record within three years of Roswell. Perhaps down the line you'd expand upon your comment about the base adjutant. I'd be interested to learn more.William Strathmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01641055950393700958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-35047450852644408382015-08-05T19:08:12.798-07:002015-08-05T19:08:12.798-07:00BB wrote
"Well aren't you the guy who cl...BB wrote<br /><br />"Well aren't you the guy who claims Roswell was "humans from the future" as per your previous posts"<br /><br />No BB, I never claimed that what fell at Roswell was humans from the future - this is the "first choice" of one pro-Roswell researcher when he discussed this with me in person in July 2012. Again - it is just his first choice.<br /><br />I do not know what crashed at Roswell but I do not rule out the possibility of a time traveler (there a certain things that lead me down that path, but I have no hard evidence of this of course).<br /><br />But again, you are off topic.Nitramhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09658903255370299035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-8739885308005065112015-08-05T13:50:08.198-07:002015-08-05T13:50:08.198-07:00CDA -
The initial reference to them was made to u...CDA -<br /><br />The initial reference to them was made to us by Bill English. At the time, we had no reason to reject him... it was later that I learned his "credentials" didn't stand up to scrutiny.<br /><br />Brian -<br /><br />Thanks for your permission. My intent was not to kill the conversation about the nuns' diaries, but to kill the ancillary issues such as Gordon Cooper's UFO sighting.<br /><br />And many of us who said the diaries existed did not lie. That was the point of the post. To show how we had gotten to the point where we believed the diaries existed. It wasn't just a single source, but a combination of sources... that fact that Kaufmann lied to us, and that Bill English lied to us, doesn't make us liars. Too trusting perhaps, but certainly not liars... so, once again, tone down the rhetoric, or go elsewhere.<br /><br />Oh, you are correct. Everyone needs to stop making reference to them. KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-76326456067864047982015-08-05T12:43:13.291-07:002015-08-05T12:43:13.291-07:00Kevin:
If you want to kill conversation fine.
Th...Kevin:<br /><br />If you want to kill conversation fine.<br /><br />This topic is dead. <br /><br />Point made.<br /><br />The Nun's diaries never existed. The Ufologist's who claim they did lied or never provided evidence they were real, and today's Ufologists need to stop referencing them because it's bad investigation.<br /><br />Done. Summary complete.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-26338607757923149322015-08-05T12:41:10.918-07:002015-08-05T12:41:10.918-07:00I would like to take Kevin's hint and return t...I would like to take Kevin's hint and return to the nuns' diaries and the diary entries Kevin presented in his initial posting.<br /><br />Who wrote those diary entries? Any ideas, Kevin?<br /><br />It was certainly someone very familiar with Roswell 'lore' in the early 1990s, who had probably read both Randle/Schmitt books and maybe several articles. So who was it? Who had the skills and knowledge to do it, and make it look like official notes?cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-84867570013133701342015-08-05T12:37:20.168-07:002015-08-05T12:37:20.168-07:00All -
This discussion is about the posting I made...All -<br /><br />This discussion is about the posting I made and not all these ancillary issues. I sid those other discussions would end.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-1478784521519045012015-08-05T10:10:35.306-07:002015-08-05T10:10:35.306-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Paul Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04267452625547760508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-39239640630239819302015-08-05T09:49:56.150-07:002015-08-05T09:49:56.150-07:00All -
This discussion is becoming unnecessarily a...All -<br /><br />This discussion is becoming unnecessarily acrimonious and that will cease now. It is also badly off track and that will end.<br /><br />Brian -<br /><br />The documentation you wish existed, in fact, never did. Soldiers who cleaned the debris field were from Roswell and therefore no orders would have been issued. The trip tickets for the trucks would have indicated the distance the truck drove but not the destination. Such documents would have followed the truck, if it was moved to a different military installation and would have been lost when the truck was replaced. Aircraft flight documents carrying material out of Roswell could easily have been called cross country navigation problems which tells nothing of the nature of any cargo carried, and once those aircraft were replaced, the documentation would have followed them as well. If the aircraft was destroyed through accident or combat (such as in the Korean War). Individuals deployed from other installations would have had orders and filled out travel vouchers, but again, those documents would have been destroyed long ago though some individuals might have retained copies. There would be nothing on those documentations to tell us what was going on other than a somewhat generic assignment. You'd need the names of those individuals to see if they retained them, or if the family still held them. So, your demand for some specific documents fails because those records, if found, would not provide the information you want.<br /><br />I have never claimed 700 witnesses... and I have not used Frank Kaufmann as a source since we discovered beyond a doubt that he was not to be trusted. I will note here that we proved that while others merely rejected his testimony because they didn't like it.<br /><br />Finally, I have testimony from the base adjutant about the steps taken to hide the information and how they altered records and the like... oh, wait, that is testimony was you'll reject it automatically as unreliable.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-58501840777475228122015-08-05T09:45:18.997-07:002015-08-05T09:45:18.997-07:00@ Paul and William -
Thanks for clarification on ...@ Paul and William -<br /><br />Thanks for clarification on Cooper. I recall reading somewhere the film was wing camera footage, but that must be incorrect and more associated with astronauts who claimed they had seen films, photographs, etc captured from their own aircraft or someone else's. If the event Cooper saw on the film did happen (probably did), I might ask the simple question as to how an alien crew from another star system would have the foreknowledge to "photo bomb" this planned exercise? Would it not be more likely that a covert unit already flying this craft (made by humans) was purposely flown there unanounced since other aircraft were also scheduled to be filmed? Sounds to me like someone ordered "take that thing out there and show them something they haven't seen, crash their party, and let's assess their reaction...". Before you say "that can't happen in the military and that proves you know nothing about the military"....let me remind you of the clip of the LTC who thought it would be interesting on the day of his retirement to take up a B52 and "show off" to family and friends just how well he could sport fly the bomber. It crashed headlong killing everyone after about 2 minutes. On his own authority he took a B52 for a joy ride....and don't remind me about "protocol this and that". If you have the proper authority clearly you can act within it.<br /><br />@ cda <br /><br />What? Those fairy photos AREN'T real? Oh man you just burst my paranormal bubble. And here I was thinking those little winged things were just another form of alien visiting here in shiny silver "UFO's. Oh well...got to go read HG Wells now...he said we are going to be invaded by men from Mars. I need to get my "bug out" gear in order. Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-68473990431066727552015-08-05T09:36:43.792-07:002015-08-05T09:36:43.792-07:00William S:
So you would expect Blanchard, having ...William S:<br /><br />So you would expect Blanchard, having just participated in the discovery of the first ever visit (as far as is known) to earth of intelligent beings from elsewhere, would simply go away for 2 or 3 weeks on leave, as if nothing important had happened? <br /><br />I do NOT think his age, plus his bombings of Japan are relevant in the slightest. Do you?<br /><br />Of course it may be that Blanchard had read so much SF in his youth that he became immune to the idea of an ET visit and regarded it as an unimportant everyday occurrence. You never can tell!cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-47048328474322953112015-08-05T09:17:31.693-07:002015-08-05T09:17:31.693-07:00b”h
Gordon Cooper’s experience to which I referre...b”h<br /><br />Gordon Cooper’s experience to which I referred to above did not involve gun camera film.<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnWsKzVvTlc<br /><br />Toward the end of this segment Fox asked Cooper if he’d kept up on what happened to the film. Cooper’s response is what I referred to above, that in the military the chain of command drives the daily show. It makes no difference if Cooper or Blanchard were curious about their respective events. Cooper explained that since he was not in the position of a need to know, then he was no longer privy to information about it. Same would hold true for Blanchard. Blanchard, by the way, was an old, grey 31 years old in 1947, had participated in low level fire bombings of Japan, was the alternate for Tibbets for the Hiroshima strike, and was involved in the post war atomic tests. So I don’t see Blanchard jumping out of his socks at strange reports.William Strathmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01641055950393700958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-13458237558510538382015-08-05T08:57:47.192-07:002015-08-05T08:57:47.192-07:00CDA....I agree with you that neither the Whitechap...CDA....I agree with you that neither the Whitechapel Murders, nor the deeds of General Gordon of Khartoum could be considered as momentous as the capturing of technology from another world...thereby proving intelligent ET life exists.<br /><br /> But can't you see that you're reinforcing my point?<br /><br /> If the "powers that be" can refuse access to files stretching back over 120 years, concerning subjects that we would consider trivial by comparison...then maybe they would also feel quite comfortable in denying us files on a much more far reaching an event, such as irrefutable evidence of visitation from ET's. <br /><br />In short...If they can keep small stuff classified for over 100 years...what is so unbelievable about keeping big stuff classified since 1947? <br /><br />........<br /><br />Brian...I'm not sure where you get this notion that the images sent "up the chain" by Cooper was simply gun camera footage??? <br /><br /> My understanding was that the photographers were a dedicated film crew, on land, all set up and ready to photograph and film other aircraft...when this flying saucer turned up and basically photo-bombed the event. Hovered silently, landed silently, then took off silently...seemingly for the benefit of the photographers.<br /> Sounds crazy, I know, but it was practically posing for them.<br />Although Cooper wasn't there at the time, he saw the negatives of the "stills" and said they were outstanding quality. Cooper knew these guys and he certainly believed them...otherwise he wouldn't make an arse of himself and send them to the Pentagon. (or wherever this stuff goes.) <br /><br />But it wasn't gun camera footage, unless we're talking about different events here?Paul Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04267452625547760508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-60025637744001018112015-08-05T08:21:38.227-07:002015-08-05T08:21:38.227-07:00Brian:
Yes there are too many 'respected pers...Brian:<br /><br />Yes there are too many 'respected persons' involved in ufology. In fact almost everyone who has researched or written about UFOs is a 'respected person' to some, perhaps to many, other ET believers. They may indeed be genuinely respected in other fields, but in ufology, or other paranormal subjects, this need not apply. A good historical example being Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and his endorsement of the (in)famous Cottingley fairy photographs of long ago. After all, if someone like him says the photos are genuine, then they must be. Or must they?<br /><br />Certain people, however, are 'disrespected', I regret to say. As far as commenters on this blog are concerned, the disrespected ones MAY include you and me. Think of that! <br /><br />But I digress. Sorry.cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-38549350629645863082015-08-05T08:04:38.562-07:002015-08-05T08:04:38.562-07:00@ Rudiak:
In your previous post you state "....@ Rudiak:<br /><br />In your previous post you state "..I have heard unverified stories.." that some people kept notes or diaries. In addition you state "...though we have certainly heard a few stories of some military people keeping samples of the debris, none of it being verified, however." Once again it is important to point out that "unverified stories" are not evidence of anything. And yet you claim it is.<br /><br />You also go on to write, "...Even Sheridan Cavitt in his AF interview, related the story of Marcel keeping one sample of foil, which he saw at a barbeque hosted by Marcel. Cavitt said he told Marcel he should get rid of it, and they buried it in Marcel's back yard. From what I've heard, a concrete porch was later poured over it."<br /><br />Actually, if true, that flys directly in the face of Marcel's son's testimony, which more than once in taped interviews states that Marcel Jr. recalls his mother having swept small pieces of debris out of the kitchen the following morning because she thought it to be "junk". He stated that the concrete patio was later placed over the area right outside the kitchen door by other owners and that the whereabouts of any small pieces remains unknown. So who's story is right? Both? Some? None? Again these are STORIES that are unverifiable and provide no evidence whatsoever. Then again, I suppose perhaps your "liquid memory metal" may have just rolled out of the kitchen and under the door all by itself since no doubt it was a part of a "living machine" that just had to get back to mama...<br /><br />And you state, "The British Enigma code project employed thousands of people, yet when WWII ended, nobody spoke a word of it for over 30 years and nobody kept notes, drawings, etc. In fact, the computers were all destroyed (including the world's first all-electronic one) and nearly all diagrams as to how they were constructed. I was told this in a public tour of Bletchley Park. Destruction of records was done to prevent the Russians from discovering just how advanced the British decoding efforts had become. Everybody was told to shut up and forget about it for national security reasons, and they did."<br /><br />Your destruction comment is flat out wrong. Perhaps your tour guide had a little too much ale at the tavern the night before? While that museum often claims that, it isn't actually correct. The facts are the British destroyed some, but not all (again if you have technological advantage over a Cold War enemy why would you destroy it?. Here's why they didn't and why what you state is in error.<br /><br />First - the US finally got UK permission to copy the machine in 1942, and by 1945 between the two countries there were and estimated 255 machines still in existance. The US kept theirs, and the British did this, quote: <br /><br />"After World War II, some fifty bombes were retained at Eastcote, while the rest were destroyed. The surviving bombes were put to work, possibly on Eastern bloc ciphers. The official history of the bombe states that some of these machines were to be stored away but others were required to run new jobs and sixteen machines were kept comparatively busy on menus. It is interesting to note that most of the jobs came up and the operating, checking and other times maintained were faster than the best times during the war periods." - source: Smith, Michael (2007) [1998], Station X: The Codebreakers of Bletchley Park, Pan Grand Strategy Series (Pan Books, Revised and Extended ed.), London: Pan McMillan Ltd, ISBN 978-0-330-41929-1 <br /><br />Obviously they did keep diaries, notes, and the actual machines. You stand duly corrected..........so the question remains. Why none of this stuff for the Roswell incident?Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-90786180120483846482015-08-05T07:06:26.488-07:002015-08-05T07:06:26.488-07:00@ Nitram:
"...guess I'm just adding fuel...@ Nitram:<br /><br />"...guess I'm just adding fuel to the fire but Geez, taking on two of the worlds most respected researchers on an event that you quite clearly know very little about - good one BB."<br /><br />Know little about? Well aren't you the guy who claims Roswell was "humans from the future" as per your previous posts?. I think perhaps the opposite is really the situation here. Not a single point of evidence, witness testimony or otherwise, that your "time travelers from earth's future" fell down and hurt themselves in 1947. Nada. Why don't you provide this evidence, including photos, diaries, FOIA documents, and the like that prove to all of us that your hypothesis is the correct one? Can you do that please? Thanks.<br /><br />Also, its important to note that just because DR and KR have published on this subject does not mean they are somehow elevated to a status beyond reproach concerning their conclusions or even their work. They have to provide as much evidence to back their claims as they demand of others who may disagree. And aren't you the blogger who just said this was an "investigation"? If so, then both men (anyone in fact) are subject to inquiry regarding their claims, just as any witness of the incident might be, and especially if they have done research on the subject. I fear too many "believers" elevate their Roswell heros to an almost "god like" status in such a way that these "persons of high stature" should never be questioned by anyone regarding their "gospel truth", as though they were some kind of "high priest" making up the basic foundation of a true believer's "religion".<br /><br />@ cda - Yes as you state it has been shown conclusive that Joyce's testimony "evolved" over the years regarding any and all interactions with Brazel and the Roswell incident. While unproven, I would suspect like any news personality the better the story the more professional attention and potential advancement one brings to their own media career. The people who claim Joyce's testimony is "iron clad" are the same people who pummel and curse the news media as being "anti-UFO". Again...demonstration of a cherry-picker's paradise.<br /><br />@ Paul - Yes, perhaps there was more to the quality of the still shots and gun camera footage. My point was that such things (photos etc.) are pretty common place in the UFO world...but the so called "holy grail" of all UFO cases, and the "biggest event in human history" pales in comparison to such evidence shot from a moving aircraft. After all, we are talking about dead and living aliens, crashed debris being supposedly strewn for miles, death threats, etc. Very different. I don't think Cooper is deliberetly telly a lie, I believe he is confused, and telling what he believes to be true. The same thing people claim when they say Frankie Rowe is a wonderful person and would never lie. Also, while clearly a national hero, let's remember that NASA does not endorse his opinions on these matters, and after all we are talking about a man who while stating his belief in ET did also claim that no astronaut, himself included, ever saw aliens in space or on the moon, contradicting any of the ET believers' stories that they did.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-30981064380895066872015-08-05T04:04:58.882-07:002015-08-05T04:04:58.882-07:00Nitram:
"Do you not think it possible that C...Nitram:<br /><br />"Do you not think it possible that CEO's of large corporations know more about their businesses than they disclose to the media?"<br /><br />Yes it is certainly possible. <br /><br />But do YOU think that if a CEO of a large corporation happened to know that his company employees stumbled across a crashed ET craft and its occupants he, or the company, would be keeping it under wraps in company vaults for 68 years?<br /><br />DR:<br /><br />Re the teletypes kept by Joyce. I assume he kept many, perhaps most, of the teletypes (on all manner of subjects) produced by his office during his time there. Some people just love collecting paper. So I do not attach any importance to the Roswell papers he kept. Notice how none was secret in any way. <br /><br /><br /><br />Paul Young:<br /><br />I suggest that the retained Jack the Ripper files are not "classified" at all. They are held back, possibly, out of respect for the descendants of the victims (or maybe they show up the incompetence of Scotland Yard at the time), though I concede it is a very long time since 1888. I did once read that there were files relating to General Gordon of Khartoum (c. 1885) which were still secret. What about these?<br /><br />Neither is really on a par with the scientific discovery of an ET visit to earth, is it?cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.com