tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post3908807827929711990..comments2024-03-19T11:13:40.642-07:00Comments on A Different Perspective: The Roswell Investigation and the SkepticsKRandlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comBlogger93125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-31534147274455913662012-05-25T02:20:53.532-07:002012-05-25T02:20:53.532-07:00I had a brief look.
"With its combination of...I had a brief look.<br /><br />"With its combination of adventure, travel and hard-hitting science, this series offers a radical new spin on this unexplained phenomenon. Instead of just stories, Ryder, Ben and James are out to get evidence. And what they uncover could change what we know and believe about another intelligence among the stars."<br /><br />Funny, but I seem to have read this sort of thing before, ad nauseam.<br /><br />The team look more like film stars than real investigators. And the above sounds like spin. A lot of spin. <br /><br />And there will be nothing new under the sun, or stars, either. At least that is my prediction.<br /><br />But then I'm only a skeptic.cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-81558938830013256382012-05-25T01:11:47.954-07:002012-05-25T01:11:47.954-07:00Have you heard about new tv show "Chasing UFO...Have you heard about new tv show "Chasing UFOs" on National Geographic Channel? <br /><br />A part of this new series description:<br /><br />'While investigating video of a possible UFO in New Mexico, the team ends up at the famed crash site in Roswell where they uncovered tantalizing evidence of a military cover-up.'<br /><br />http://tvblogs.nationalgeographic.com/2012/05/23/introducing-the-chasing-ufos-team/<br /><br />I wonder what it might be. Something the Dream Team already knows or maybe sth that top researchers are unaware of?Konrad, Polandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13510925687345217668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-79267635034944424072012-05-25T01:09:55.719-07:002012-05-25T01:09:55.719-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Konrad, Polandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13510925687345217668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-44873843698466714922012-05-21T17:00:34.625-07:002012-05-21T17:00:34.625-07:00It is doubtful, however, that he would welcome dis...It is doubtful, however, that he would welcome discussion of the issue. He is 110% motivated toward promoting his RBE model to the world before his death (quickly approaching the century mark). Furthermore, he has a hard enough time defending the feasibility of the RBE model, he wouldn't take the chance of being discredited further by a connection to UFOs and Roswell.Synergyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02534283906248936569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-21866767239072087752012-05-21T16:57:44.350-07:002012-05-21T16:57:44.350-07:00To all Roswell researchers -- Please look into Jac...To all Roswell researchers -- Please look into Jacque Fresco. There may be a connection between Fresco and Roswell.<br /><br />Fresco was interested in flying saucer designs as early as the late 30's and early 40's. Here is one such design: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jacque_Fresco_-_Flying_Saucer.jpg<br /><br />Jacque Fresco has mentioned in various lectures and Q&A's (albeit briefly) that he also helped Frank Scully investigate UFO reports, particularly photographs (and was not impressed). These can be found with a simple youtube search. He has also mentioned nitinol and memory materials in his lectures and in his documentary Future by Design (about 41 minutes and 50 seconds in).<br /><br />It is known Fresco did indeed work at Wright Field in the 40's. It is not inconceivable, being that he was considered "a man twenty years ahead of his time" that his assistance would be requested in any crash retrieval analysis. <br /><br />Moreover, given his previous interest in such designs, maybe the design was his own!!Synergyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02534283906248936569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-52324197910785977032012-05-17T12:04:50.595-07:002012-05-17T12:04:50.595-07:00DR writes, sarcastically:
"Yep, major newspa...DR writes, sarcastically:<br /><br />"Yep, major newspapers like the NY Times and Washington Post with their Pentagon correspondents, made up the story of Vandenberg going to the Pentagon press room to handle the crisis." <br /><br />Really? Look again at those two reports and you will not find the word "crisis", although one of them does use the word "excitement", which has a very different meaning.<br /><br />In other words, the so-called "crisis" is an invention of the conspiracists. (Surprise!)<br /><br />DR should realise that if his ET crash + conspiracy idea is true, Vandenberg's logs would certainly have entries about it, maybe under a code word, not only for July 8 but for July 9, 10, 11 and the rest of the month as well as for, probably, August. Think of all the conferences, reports, teletypes etc. that would ensue.<br /><br />The same would apply to Gen. Spaatz's logs (as AF Chief of Staff) for July and August, and beyond. <br /><br />So get to it DR, find those logs. Goddammit, there must be SOMETHING in writing about it all, mustn't there? Or was it all deliberately erased?cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-50970517145816607902012-05-17T11:15:06.143-07:002012-05-17T11:15:06.143-07:00David, regarding Brazel bringing samples...
No ma...David, regarding Brazel bringing samples...<br /><br />No matter the different stories of when Brazel found the object, fact is it had been down for awhile. Is there any reason, any urgency, to visit the site at night? Why not wait til morning? Whatever created the urgency could have been "exhibits". <br /><br />David wrote: "What I still don't understand is why Marcel would neglect to mention this important part of the story (even if to deny that Brazel brought samples), unless he simply forgot. It's certainly a question I would want to ask him if he were still around."<br /><br />I wouldn't expect the military men involved to be straightforward or forthcoming about it all. I won't say they were lying -- I mean Marcel and probably Haut -- but that there are places they would not go.<br /><br />The Rhodes case has so much interesting information in it about this period...<br /><br />In the Hayden Hewes' Rhodes story in 1978, Rhodes recalls the 'Espionage Act' letter Col. McCoy sent him 30 years earlier. Through this time (a May 1977 interview by GSW) Rhodes was not forthcoming or straightforward about the case. It appears four prints and two negatives were returned to him in 1954. When Dr McDonald interviews him in the mid 1960s, all he got was a newspaper clipping from Rhodes. In 1977 GSW gets what appears to them to be "first generation copies" of the second photo. Since the article doesn't show a full frame, we don't know if it was cropped.<br /><br />I haven't been able to find out what the SHG got from Rhodes. For all we know, his negatives are sitting in a box somewhere where the SHG once had roamed.<br /><br />Two things of interest and why I mention it, it demonstrates the effect of "the oath of secrecy" even on those who are telling some things about the "secret". And two, just how good someone's memory can be about unusual circumstances thirty years later.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />DonDonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01987893108986661582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-77515840522948789542012-05-17T09:47:11.070-07:002012-05-17T09:47:11.070-07:00Part 3 of 3:
Vandenberg et al rushing about the Pe...Part 3 of 3:<br /><i>Vandenberg et al rushing about the Pentagon in panic-stricken mode? But, lo & behold, Vandenberg's log shows nothing about it.</i><br /><br />Another incredibly lame argument: If Vandenberg didn't write it down, it never happened. And, of course, cda doesn't find that the least bit curious, even though Vandenberg's log the previous day goes into great detail about his dealings with a hoax disc case from Houston that didn't get much publicity at all, and was based on nothing more than a newspaper rumor.<br /><br />But Roswell, which was all over the radio and in all the newspaper, not a single word, even though it was the result of an official release from one of Vandenberg's commands that they had an actual flying disc (did I forget to mention that?).<br /><br /><i>Maybe the press exaggerated that part of the story. Not so, say the conspiracists.</i><br /><br />Hah, hah. More irony Another stupid conspiracy theory from cda. The press made it all up. Yep, major newspapers like the NY Times and Washington Post with their Pentagon correspondents, made up the story of Vandenberg going to the Pentagon press room to handle the crisis. Now how do you "exaggerate" something like that? Either Vandenberg did it or he didn't.<br /><br /><i>The logs were redacted or the event was deliberately omitted. Normal logic says the event was considered insignificant and therefore not logged.</i> <br /><br />cda does not have "normal logic" at all. The newspaper stories PROVE Vandenberg went to the press room to deal with Roswell, which resulted from the press release from the RAAF, not some silly rumor. The newspapers also reported the Pentagon being flooded with calls from reporters clamoring for details. Not only was Vandenberg's routine disrupted, so was the entire Pentagon.<br /><br />But cda says this was a "nothing" event not worthy of mention in Vandenberg's log, therefore it must be so. <br /><br />To people with truly "normal logic" the fact that Vandenberg's log doesn't say anything about an obviously significant event that disrupted his command, is another dog that didn't bark.David Rudiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213284910238852377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-58189398229148855282012-05-17T09:44:44.046-07:002012-05-17T09:44:44.046-07:00Part 2 of 3:
I can claim the GAO would have locat...Part 2 of 3:<br /><br /><i>I can claim the GAO would have located any such records (which is what they were charged to do).</i> <br /><br />The FBI Roswell telegram specifically mentioned that the FBI in Cincinnati was to be informed of Wright Field's examination of the debris. Therefore the GAO DID go looking for the follow-up memo to the FBI that SHOULD have been written, but either never was or was deeply buried.<br /><br />Yet we have all sorts of paperwork from the Illinois hoax radio parts disc of the same period, where the FBI received a very detailed report back from Wright Field, but nothing at all about Roswell.<br /><br />But cda sees nothing odd about this. <br /><br /><i>They didn't. Were the GAO incompetent? Were the GAO being deceived all along?</i> <br /><br />The GAO went looking in FBI files and those of Wright Field and could not find the promised report back to the FBI. Nor could they find any paperwork at all, anywhere, except for the one FBI Dallas telegram of July 8.<br /><br /><i>Presumably DR would say "yes they were".</i><br /><br />It actually takes a conspiracist mindset to NOT see that something is very odd here.<br /><br /><i>As for it being "top secret paperwork", again this shows a conspiracist's mindset. NOBODY can say whether any such paperwork was top secret or not, since nobody has seen it!</i><br /><br />No, it takes a fool to argue that an actual flying saucer crash wouldn't be highly classified if the powers that be decided to bury it.<br /><br />In January 1949, we DO have an FBI document where they state that the subject of flying saucers and the green fireballs WAS classified "top secret". We have seen very few of these "top secret" documents. And BTW, the FBI was informed of this because the green fireballs had triggered a search by the CIC and AFOSI for possible crash remains, headed by Dr. Lincoln LaPaz. They wanted the FBI to assist them in locating and interviewing witnesses to the fireballs so that LaPaz might triangulate a trajectory that could lead them to crash remains.<br /><br />Likewise, we have another "top secret" document from the USAF Europe citing the opinion of Swedish military intelligence that their analysts believed the saucers and the earlier "ghost rockets" over Sweden seen to explode and crash into lakes were of extraterrestrial manufacture, since no nation on earth could duplicate the observed performance.<br /><br />But I guess one has to have a "conspiracist mindset" to read such "top secret" documents saying the subject is "top secret", including searches for physical debris, and come to the conclusion that the subject is "top secret". <br /><br /><i>The 'top secret' aspect of it all is an assumption, nothing else, by those who want to promote a long suppressed (for 65 years now) official knowledge of an ET visit to earth.</i><br /><br />If you say so. Maybe you should try reading the documents saying the subject is "top secret", even though a child would realize something of this import would be highly classified.David Rudiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213284910238852377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-64515320182117355882012-05-17T09:43:28.138-07:002012-05-17T09:43:28.138-07:00I wrote (part 1 of 3)
"CDA again plays dumb a...I wrote (part 1 of 3)<br />"CDA again plays dumb and acts like this was a totally nothing event. If it was truly nothing, probably none of us would have ever heard of it."<br /><br />Followed by cda's usual inane commentary:<br /><i>These are all indicators of a conspiracist mind. A good response is that, yes, nobody had heard of it (except for a brief 24-hour period in '47, quickly forgotten) for 30+ years until a crashed saucer zealot (Friedman) and two popular writers of the paranormal (Berlitz and Moore) first brought it to the attention of the world. Had they not done so, we would still be unaware of it.</i><br /><br />Hah, hah. I get accused of a having a "conspiracist mind" only to have cda quickly spout his usual conspiracy theory that Roswell was created by Friedman, Berlitz and Moore who planted the idea of a crashed saucer in the minds of the witnesses. No, Roswell was created by the RAAF in 1947 saying they had captured a flying disc.<br /><br /><i>The records "that should exist" do not exist. Conspiracists tell us that this is because the USAF is still hiding them. Normal logic tells us they never existed because the event was too trivial and unimportant to produce written records.</i><br /><br />cda deliberately ignoring the point I raised that Roswell was one of the most highly publicized saucer cases of its time, literally front page/headline news in this country and abroad.<br /><br />Was this the result of "saucer zealots" pumping up a "nothing" case? No it was because a very important Air Force base put out an official press release that they actually had recovered one.<br /><br />Yet nary a word in Project Blue Book files, even though far less publicized or unpublicized trivial cases, including recovered radar targets, are in there, such as the Circleville radar target of around July 6.<br /><br />Let's repeat, since cda is again being deliberately obtuse: Roswell became widely known because of an official press release from an Air Force base that they had captured a flying saucer. <br /><br />And this should have generated all sorts of internal paperwork, even if it was a colossal screw-up. All sorts of reports would have necessarily been written, such as the promised analysis from Wright Field to the FBI, that the GAO couldn't find. What happened to it? Where is the internal analysis from Wright Field about what was supposedly flown to them? Where is the internal investigation that necessarily would have been launched into why the officers of an important base could screw up so badly? Why didn't any of the officers involved get demoted, thrown out, transferred to Siberia? ( And if it was a stupid Mogul recovery, why isn't there anything in Mogul files, since they recorded the basic recovery data on all their other balloons?)<br /><br />The absence of ANY paperwork is just way off the radar of standard operating procedure for the military.<br /><br />And that it was largely forgotten afterward is only a tribute to the success of the military debunkery (the weather balloon story).<br /><br />And BTW, cda, your continual idiotic argument that anything barely mentioned for decades means its unimportant is contradicted by all sorts of very important historical events, some of them deliberately buried for security reasons, such as the Enigma decoding program in the U.K. or the illegal radiation experiments on civilians conducted in the U.S. that were buried for 50 years. Yeah, all "nothing" events according to you.David Rudiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213284910238852377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-10999711944208939652012-05-17T08:35:24.376-07:002012-05-17T08:35:24.376-07:00Don wrote:
The only way I can think of that result...Don wrote:<br /><i>The only way I can think of that results in Marcel, Cavitt, and Rickett heading off to the ranch that evening is if Brazel's description strongly suggested an aircraft crash. Marcel would know if there were any reports of still missing aircraft the past few weeks. If there were none, then it would be unidentified and suspicious and that's why the CIC goes out to the ranch.</i><br /><br />Marcel never mentioned Brazel bringing any debris samples with him when he first came to Roswell and reported to the Sheriff. I have always found that incredibly odd, since it would have been so easy to do and used to back his claim of finding a flying disc or anything at all.<br /><br />It also flies in the face of the Sheriff's family, who said Brazel DID bring samples with him, and once Marcel and the AAF got involved they were quickly confiscated from the Sheriff. We also have the Sheriff Wilcox quote back then of "working with those fellows from the base" in explanation of why he wouldn't say more about what Brazel found.<br /><br />And finally we have Gen. Dubose's testimony of the highly secret flight of a bag of debris from Roswell bound for Washington when news first came from Roswell base about the find. Dubose said he was handling things for Ramey because Ramey was away from the base. Local newspapers confirm Ramey was away from the base Sunday July 6 attending an air show in his home town of Denton, Texas and visiting his family there.<br /><br />My point is that if Brazel did bring debris samples, which I suspect he did, then Marcel and Blanchard had more than just his descriptions of the debris and crash site to suspect a crash of a highly unusual aircraft, and that's what triggered them both into highly serious investigative mode. I doubt a simple description of rotting rubber balloons, balsa wood sticks, and aluminum foil would get their feathers all rustled. However, descriptions of unbreakable, uncuttable debris and "memory foil" probably would.<br /><br />The other thing that seemed to get their attention was Brazel's description of an extremely large debris field. Marcel himself was quoted back then saying debris was scattered over a square mile. That is why, Marcel said, Blanchard wanted him to take Cavitt along to assist him in assessing the scene and picking up as much as they could, also why they went in two vehicles instead of one.<br /><br />What I still don't understand is why Marcel would neglect to mention this important part of the story (even if to deny that Brazel brought samples), unless he simply forgot. It's certainly a question I would want to ask him if he were still around.David Rudiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213284910238852377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-26674053691700042502012-05-17T07:57:20.667-07:002012-05-17T07:57:20.667-07:00What might have happened depends on what Brazel sa...What might have happened depends on what Brazel said to Marcel. If he described a bunch of balloons and "kites", Marcel likely would have called his peer at AAAF; it might not have gotten to Blanchard even. If Brazel described a crashed saucer (with or without alien crew), I don't know what Marcel would have done. Depends on what he knew. Cavitt likely would have known what to do next: give it to the FBI.<br /><br />The only way I can think of that results in Marcel, Cavitt, and Rickett heading off to the ranch that evening is if Brazel's description strongly suggested an aircraft crash. Marcel would know if there were any reports of still missing aircraft the past few weeks. If there were none, then it would be unidentified and suspicious and that's why the CIC goes out to the ranch.<br /><br />What they found on the ranch is, of course, what is disputed.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />DonDonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01987893108986661582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-2329507234091167202012-05-17T07:15:32.851-07:002012-05-17T07:15:32.851-07:00I think the earliest mention of the crashed saucer...I think the earliest mention of the crashed saucer is the Twining memo. It is kind of a mantra "crash recovered exhibits" chanted by the guys from then on.<br /><br />I think it is the best evidence there was a crashed saucer -- or that a lot of guys in the AF believed there was. It's not very good evidence, of course.<br /><br />It really does seem like the only way they could imagine there being any physical evidence of the saucers is if one crashed. No one refers to "landed saucer exhibits" or any other kind of "exhibits".<br /><br />Even Scully makes the point the three saucers, though disabled, did not crash land.<br /><br />So, along with the 'flying disc', 'ufo', and the 'ETH', we can credit the AF with originating the concept of the "crashed saucer".<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />DonDonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01987893108986661582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-80684126597654886452012-05-17T05:39:45.923-07:002012-05-17T05:39:45.923-07:00Steve:
Maybe. But you surely don't believe th...Steve:<br /><br />Maybe. But you surely don't believe that, do you? As the wise guys will tell you, this was only 'Secret' not Top Secret. And we know, from Friedman's theorem, that a Secret report can never refer to matters that are, or were, Top Secret. Get it?cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-76651349866878062232012-05-17T05:32:50.542-07:002012-05-17T05:32:50.542-07:00CDA
Isn't there a declassified Top Secret repo...CDA<br />Isn't there a declassified Top Secret report that shows that the USAF have never recovered crashed alien craft.Steve Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14765165764276462479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-68845224903841435262012-05-17T02:52:29.452-07:002012-05-17T02:52:29.452-07:00DR writes:
"Other records should exist tha...DR writes: <br /><br />"Other records should exist that nobody can find".<br /><br />also<br /><br />"Not hard at all to hide top secret paperwork."<br /><br />also<br /><br />"CDA again plays dumb and acts like this was a totally nothing event. If it was truly nothing, probably none of us would have ever heard of it."<br /><br />These are all indicators of a conspiracist mind. A good response is that, yes, nobody had heard of it (except for a brief 24-hour period in '47, quickly forgotten) for 30+ years until a crashed saucer zealot (Friedman) and two popular writers of the paranormal (Berlitz and Moore) first brought it to the attention of the world. Had they not done so, we would still be unaware of it.<br /><br />The records "that should exist" do not exist. Conspiracists tell us that this is because the USAF is still hiding them. Normal logic tells us they never existed because the event was too trivial and unimportant to produce written records.<br /><br />I can claim the GAO would have located any such records (which is what they were charged to do). They didn't. Were the GAO incompetent? Were the GAO being deceived all along? Presumably DR would say "yes they were". <br /><br />As for it being "top secret paperwork", again this shows a conspiracist's mindset. NOBODY can say whether any such paperwork was top secret or not, since nobody has seen it!<br /><br />The 'top secret' aspect of it all is an assumption, nothing else, by those who want to promote a long suppressed (for 65 years now) official knowledge of an ET visit to earth.<br /><br />Vandenberg et al rushing about the Pentagon in panic-stricken mode? But, lo & behold, Vandenberg's log shows nothing about it. Maybe the press exaggerated that part of the story. Not so, say the conspiracists. The logs were redacted or the event was deliberately omitted. Normal logic says the event was considered insignificant and therefore not logged. <br /><br />Funny, but I have a feeling we have gone over this ground before, several times.cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-774597158388472922012-05-16T19:43:35.741-07:002012-05-16T19:43:35.741-07:00David wrote "Another interesting point. As th...David wrote "Another interesting point. As the "toilet seat" memo said, the Air Force didn't want the FBI nosing around any really significant cases, which the Air Force only was to investigate. Seems like that mindset went back to at least Roswell."<br /><br />Hoover denied the CIC request for a "joint investigation" of the Rhodes case (however, the Phoenix FBI Office didn't get the memo in time to prevent it). The only reason I can think of why Hoover wouldn't cooperate with the AF was the delimitation issue. He said it was ok for his agents to conduct an investigation, but no joint investigation. <br /><br />After the toilet seat memo the following month Hoover withdraws the FBI from saucer investigations. The FBI would forward any saucer inquiries to the AF and that was that. He seems to have taken delight in sending the goofiest saucer letters he received to Pentagon generals.<br /><br />CIC/AFOSI wanted the FBI out of saucer investigations, is what I make of it. I think the stories the AF was telling the FBI about "subersives" attempting to spread hysteria and distrust, and Soviet planes dropping discs from high altitude began to seem to Hoover as goofy as the specail letters he was forwarding to General McDonald.<br /><br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />DonDonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01987893108986661582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-44348761006715228622012-05-16T18:31:47.674-07:002012-05-16T18:31:47.674-07:00Don wrote:
David, were any of the disc stories tha...Don wrote:<br /><i>David, were any of the disc stories that got a big play in the press during the Wave not found in the files -- besides Roswell?</i><br /><br />Not that I'm aware of offhand. But I've never really dug into it either.<br /><br />When I think of the really BIG cases besides Roswell that got a lot of publicity, e.g. Arnold's sighting or the Smith United Airlines sighting of July 4, all made it into Air Force files.<br /><br />Good question, why not Roswell? Kevin has raised the same question. Why not even a newspaper clipping or a short note about it? Yet you see some truly nothing cases in there that got zero publicity. <br /><br /><i>A note on Incident #88. It began on July 5, 1947 with an unsigned telegram sent from New York, NY to the War Dept. which forwarded it to the FBI.<br /><br />That's another difference with Roswell.</i><br /><br />Interesting point. Sounds like the description of the recovered object did not grab the Pentagon's attention, obviously nothing significant, therefore let the FBI take care of it. (Much like the Air Force "toilet seat" memo several months later about letting the FBI investigate cases of ash can covers, toilet seats, etc., which so enraged FBI director Hoover.) <br /><br />Whereas, again, Roswell was treated as special by the military right from the beginning. Blanchard sent out his top two intel officers, Marcel and Cavitt. According to Marcel, after he first spoke to Brazel at the Sheriff's office and reported back to Blanchard, they both agreed that it sounded like the crash of a highly unusual craft of some kind. Blanchard ordered him to take Cavitt along and take two vehicles, since Brazel had described so much debris.<br /><br />I really don't think a little bit of rotting rubber, balsa wood sticks, and aluminum foil would have held much interest for either Blanchard or Marcel, or required both Marcel and Cavitt to go out to investigate.<br /><br /><i>Brazel's report was a civilian matter. The AAF never claimed the object was military. Brazel never implied it was military. He reported it to a civilian official, a sheriff. It was not a military matter. According to the delimination agreements between the AF and the FBI, Roswell ought to have been investigated by the FBI, not the AF. But except for the FBI telegram, there is no chatter in the released FBI files over the matter, much less a formal report. And that is very odd.</i><br /><br />Another interesting point. As the "toilet seat" memo said, the Air Force didn't want the FBI nosing around any really significant cases, which the Air Force only was to investigate. Seems like that mindset went back to at least Roswell.<br /><br /><i>Btw, David, I appreciated the "don't get it" comment 8-)</i><br /><br />Well Don, obviously you STILL don't get it. CDA assures it it was a totally nothing event, therefore nothing "odd" about a missing paper trail or anything else about Roswell. Apparently Marcel and Blanchard didn't get the memo and investigated a "toilet seat" case that the Air Force normally handed off to the FBI.David Rudiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213284910238852377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-18759655456875947432012-05-16T18:28:20.840-07:002012-05-16T18:28:20.840-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.David Rudiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213284910238852377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-75092897020947458832012-05-16T16:37:53.844-07:002012-05-16T16:37:53.844-07:00David, were any of the disc stories that got a bi...David, were any of the disc stories that got a big play in the press during the Wave not found in the files -- besides Roswell?<br /><br />A note on Incident #88. It began on July 5, 1947 with an unsigned telegram sent from New York, NY to the War Dept. which forwarded it to the FBI.<br /><br />That's another difference with Roswell. Brazel's report was a civilian matter. The AAF never claimed the object was military. Brazel never implied it was military. He reported it to a civilian official, a sheriff. It was not a military matter. According to the delimination agreements between the AF and the FBI, Roswell ought to have been investigated by the FBI, not the AF. But except for the FBI telegram, there is no chatter in the released FBI files over the matter, much less a formal report. And that is very odd.<br /><br />Btw, David, I appreciated the "don't get it" comment 8-)<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />DonDonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01987893108986661582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-88267319389368830952012-05-16T15:45:28.315-07:002012-05-16T15:45:28.315-07:00cda wrote:
The lack of a paper trail is a very goo...cda wrote:<br /><i>The lack of a paper trail is a very good pointer to the fact that nothing extraordinary happened. It was initially reported as a 'flying disc' then retracted and explained as something quite ordinary. Simple as that.</i><br /><br />Not so simple. More a case of the dog that didn't bark. There should be some sort of paper trail, even for a screw-up.<br /><br />CDA again plays dumb and acts like this was a totally nothing event. If it was truly nothing, probably none of us would have ever heard of it. <br /><br />But it was a big deal back then. The newspapers were full of front page, headline news about the new flying saucers. Speculation was rampant. There was an air of anxiety in the air. Were they Russian? Were they ours? Were they the Martians finally here? <br /><br />Then the nation's atomic bomber base puts out an OFFICIAL press release that they actually had one in their possession.<br /><br />The story was understandably a media sensation, front page news in practically every newspaper in the country, carried in many newspapers abroad.<br /><br />Newspapers carried stories about the Pentagon being tied up in knots handling all the phone calls. Same with Roswell and Fort Worth. Acting AAF Chief of Staff Vandenberg had to personally deal with it, reported going to the Pentagon press room to deal with the PR crisis.<br /><br />Then it all turns out to be a monumental screw-up? Senior officers at Roswell couldn't distinguish a supersonic flying saucer from a pound of balloon garbage?<br /><br />In the REAL world not inhabited by debunkers in denial, the Army would have launched an internal investigation to find out what happened, and maybe a few heads would have rolled. Ramey and Vandenberg would have made sure of that. Such a widely publicized screw-up would have been highly embarrassing. And do you really want fools in charge at your sensitive atomic bomber base?<br /><br />But nobody has ever found any record of such an investigation. It should have been, but wasn't--the dog that didn't bark.<br /><br />Other records should exist that nobody can find. Marcel and Blanchard should have written something up. Nada. Same with Ramey--it was his subcommand. Nada. No record of the plane flights, such as Marcel's to Fort Worth or the flight from their to Wright Field that the FBI and media were told about. Nada.<br /><br />And the FBI was told that their Cincinnati office would be told the results of the examination at Wright. Mas nada.<br /><br />More nada with paperwork from Wright Field.<br /><br />Compare with the Illinois "flying disc" case the next month that Don just brought up. The FBI turned it over to Wright Field, they did a very exhaustive analysis and sent back a detailed report to the FBI. Nothing but a hoax made of old radio parts. They even went so far as to run down the likely radio it was made from. <br /><br />That didn't get any publicity at all, yet generated a fair amount of paperwork within the FBI and Army and a detailed response from Wright Field.<br /><br />But Roswell--nada. And cda doesn't find that at least a little bit curious.<br /><br /><i>And yes, if ETs were involved there would be a paper trail large enough to fill a living room (i.e. far far more than the mere shoe box DR says was needed to store the Mogul balloon!).</i><br /><br />Not hard at all to hide top secret paperwork. Try getting your hands on Los Alamos atomic documents from the 1940s. Bet they fill a warehouse. Most of them are still classified.<br /><br />And where did I ever say only a shoebox was needed to store a "Mogul" balloon? What I said is that is all Ramey showed. A real Mogul would have required several dozen shoe boxes. <br /><br />But cda knew that. He's just playing games again.David Rudiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213284910238852377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-12675275985638887602012-05-16T09:02:55.714-07:002012-05-16T09:02:55.714-07:00Chris wrote "The lack of a paper trail is a v...Chris wrote "The lack of a paper trail is a very good pointer to the fact that nothing extraordinary happened."<br /><br />My point is not whether the incident on the Foster Ranch was an ordinary or extraordinary event, but that the absence of any paper trail is abnormal.<br /><br />I think the events as reported by the press (and gotten almost solely from the AF) are abnormal, beginning with Brazel reporting his find to the Chaves County Sheriffs.<br /><br />My understanding of Roswell is unrelated to that of the Roswell investigators, pro or con ET, of the past 30 years.<br /><br />When I comment on Roswell, I do not line up for or against, or refer to, their opinions.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />DonDonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01987893108986661582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-43748571538580901342012-05-16T02:09:05.587-07:002012-05-16T02:09:05.587-07:00DR:
I never said that nobody accompanied Marcel t...DR:<br /><br />I never said that nobody accompanied Marcel to the ranch. I merely said that it was, quite probably, not Cavitt. You may recall that it was only when Bill Moore located the newspaper reports (after a long search, since Marcel could not remember the date) and found mention of a second man going to the ranch, that Marcel told Moore/Friedman that someone else went with him. Until then Marcel said nothing about another man being with him.<br /><br />In his initial interview with Moore/Friedman in Sept 1982 Cavitt denied being there at all. He claimed to know nothing about the affair. Later he revised his story then retracted parts of it and so on. By the time the USAF met him in 1994 it was a "yes I was there, but....." story he told McAndrew (or was it Weaver?). <br /><br />So I can claim, quite properly, that neither you nor any investigator, has shown conclusively that Cavitt was at the ranch. Yes, you can prove SOMEONE else was there, but who was it? And how many others were there, if any?<br /><br />How anyone can possibly trust Easley's testimony I cannot understand. Look, for example, at his recorded interview with KDR in ROSWELL UFO CRASH UPDATE. What a shambles. It is the same shambles with General Exon too. Read it yourself. Yet these are supposed to be reliable testimonies from those who "were there". <br /><br /><br />Don:<br /><br />The lack of a paper trail is a very good pointer to the fact that nothing extraordinary happened. It was initially reported as a 'flying disc' then retracted and explained as something quite ordinary. Simple as that. <br /><br />And yes, if ETs were involved there would be a paper trail large enough to fill a living room (i.e. far far more than the mere shoe box DR says was needed to store the Mogul balloon!).cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-39430732017846943802012-05-15T18:49:07.489-07:002012-05-15T18:49:07.489-07:00So, Chris, what's a paper pusher like me to do...So, Chris, what's a paper pusher like me to do in the absence of paper? Look for related material and try to get a handle on the thinking of the AF as it might pertain to Roswell. <br /><br />Since Nick Redfern already posted it, it saves me the trouble.<br /><br />Incident #88<br /><br />http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2011/02/roswell-deflating-mogul/<br /><br />If Nick is reading he may want to look at MAXW-PBB3-10 in which the footnote gives some information about Mrs Whedon.<br /><br />I'm reorganizing my site and moving it, but there are still a few things about Roswell on it.<br /><br />http://www.foreshadower.net<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />DonDonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01987893108986661582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-79060302800253930992012-05-15T17:42:56.994-07:002012-05-15T17:42:56.994-07:00"And I made the very important point that the..."And I made the very important point that the photos PROVE beyond any doubt that there was hardly any balloon material there. I measured it, and it would all fit in a show box. That practically destroys the Mogul hypothesis right there."<br /><br />And of course you have a signed affidavit from the participants and documented proof that says:<br /><br />"Everything that was picked up on the ranch is in these photographs!"<br /><br />Until you can prove this, you don't even have a point. This is just so silly.<br /><br />Let me see if I can explain it to you (knowing that it will do no good):<br /><br />Dick and Jane own a lot of books.<br /><br />Dick takes a photo of some of the books.<br /><br />Are all of Dick and Jane's books in the photo?<br /><br />No. No, No.<br /><br />Where are the rest of the books?<br /><br />They are not in the picture.<br /><br />There they are.<br /><br />They are on a another shelf.<br /><br />Jane laughs.<br /><br />LanceLancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17280922104955532058noreply@blogger.com