tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post6721143885984830064..comments2024-03-19T11:13:40.642-07:00Comments on A Different Perspective: James Carrion, The Roswell Deception and the Press ReleaseKRandlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comBlogger64125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-58640751574585883092019-08-28T18:26:31.899-07:002019-08-28T18:26:31.899-07:00I posted about this a long time ago and it has nev...I posted about this a long time ago and it has never been addressed. That is that the press release - ANY version of the press release is WRONG.<br /><br />It is not factual. It is not what happened according to the witnesses.<br /><br />The PR says that a "disc landed", a disc "was recovered" and so forth. Brazzel and Marcell, who were there both say that it was wreckage, little pieces of foil, sticks (metal or otherwise), rubber, paper, etc. You could collect it and put it in the trunk of your car. That according to the newspaper accounts at the time and interviews through the years. <br /><br />A long time ago I realized that something was very wrong with Haut's PR, if in fact he talked to Marcell about what he saw (as far as I know Haut did not talk with Brazzel).<br /><br />I have always suspected that Haut was making it up. Maybe he just wanted to give the papers something to print but didn't realize it would "go viral" as we say today. I have my doubts that Blanchard read the PR and approved it - unless he did not talk to Marcell first - because Marcell would NOT have told him they had a disc or most of one. Could it be that Blanchard was going on vacation and didn't read the PR? But that still does not answer why it is not true to what Brazzel and Marcell saw.<br /><br />If Carrion is right in his theory then you could say the reason why the PR talked about a whole disc when there was none was to "fool" the Soviets. But would Haut go to his grave without saying that he "juiced up" the PR as part of a intelligence operation? I guess so if it is still classified...Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14970494602524191565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-5465542354138904872019-01-17T04:14:44.056-08:002019-01-17T04:14:44.056-08:00Ben Moss said:
"This is probably the biggest...Ben Moss said:<br /><br />"This is probably the biggest reach and miss for a Roswell explanation I have seen, so far. Completely wrong for so many reasons."<br /><br />You have provided no justification for your statement. Cite your "many reasons" so they can be discussed/refuted.James Carrionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138149666834514145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-66782414295168771412019-01-16T12:21:15.824-08:002019-01-16T12:21:15.824-08:00This is probably the biggest reach and miss for a ...This is probably the biggest reach and miss for a Roswell explaination I have seen, so far. Completely wrong for so many reasons.TheUFOGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02846005362986281745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-47426540476682752312019-01-14T06:09:31.702-08:002019-01-14T06:09:31.702-08:00I am inclined to consider Roswell a limited CI ope...I am inclined to consider Roswell a limited CI operation.<br />I am not inclinded to see Arnold's sighting and report as a CI operation.<br /><br />From Arnold’s letter to General Twining -- pp 67–75 of James's book.<br /><br />“I flew directly toward Mt. Rainier after reaching an altitude of about 9,500 feet, which is the approximate elevation of the high plateau from which Mt. Rainier rises. I had made one sweep of this high plateau to the westward, searching all of the various ridges for this marine ship <b>and flew to the west down and near the ridge side of the canyon where Ashford, Washington, is located.<br /><br />Unable to see anything that looked like the lost ship, I made a 360 degree turn to the right and above the little city of Mineral, starting again toward Mt. Rainier. I climbed back up to an altitude of approximately 9,200 feet.</b><br /><br />[So Arnold is flying around all over the place in a very small private a/c.]<br /><br />'The air was so smooth that day that it was a real pleasure flying and, as most pilots do when the air is smooth and they are flying at a higher altitude, I trimmed out my airplane in the direction of Yakima, Washington, which was almost directly east of my position and simply sat in my plane observing the sky and the terrain.<br /><br />There was a DC-4 to the left and to the rear of me <b>approximately fifteen miles distance,</b> and I should judge, at 14,000-foot elevation.<br /><br />[Hard for me to imagine that a DC-4 (?C-54?) crew are going to be able to visually locate a small private plane 15 miles away to pull off a Counter Intel operation. Or does James think they were just randomly trolling for unsuspecting pilots?]<br /><br />[ . . . ]<br /><br />These [unidentified] objects <b>being quite far away,</b> I was unable for a few seconds to make out their shape or their formation. Very shortly they approached Mt. Rainier, and I observed their outline against the snow quite plainly.<br /><br /><b>I observed them quite plainly, and I estimate my distance from them, which was almost at right angles, to be between twenty to twenty-five miles.</b> I knew they must be very large to observe their shape at that distance, even on as clear a day as it was that Tuesday.<br /><br />[If I'm not mistaken, 20 miles is well into BVR, or beyond visual range, for current considerations of fighter pilot visual acuity -- "A beyond-visual-range missile (BVR) is an air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) that is capable of engaging at ranges of 20 nmi (37 km) or beyond." Wiki. Lots of other questions then arise.]<br /><br />[ . . . ]<br /><br />My pilot's license is 333487. <b>I fly a Callair airplane; it is a three-place single engine land ship that is designed and manufactured at Afton, Wyoming as an extremely high performance, high altitude airplane that was made for mountain work.</b> [Interesting that Arnold gives a very clear plug for the private a/c he is flying, see below.] The national certificate of my plane is 33355<br /><br />/s/ Kenneth Arnold, Box 587, Boise, Idaho<br /><br />================<br />CallAir Aircraft museum<br /><br />http://callairmuseum.org/A-3.html<br /><br />“Ken Arnold made flying saucers famous. He first saw them from the cabin of a CallAir A-3! On June 24, 1947 Arnold was flying near Mt. Rainier when he witnessed a series of reflections that came from saucer-shaped objects flying in the distance. Others later made “corroborative sightings.” <b>Since then both Arnold and the CallAir have enjoyed lasting fame.</b>”<br /><br />Maybe instead of CI, Arnold was just doing a little spectacular advertising for Call Air.William Strathmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01641055950393700958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-80101591263466612192019-01-12T07:31:01.352-08:002019-01-12T07:31:01.352-08:00Re FOIA requests... As James mentioned above, I su...Re FOIA requests... As James mentioned above, I submitted a request in late 2016 for several items, including Joint Security Control (JSC) files on deception operations (The request came as a result of reading James' work). I initially received a negative response on the grounds that specific file names were required. I appealed the ruling, citing the mention of such files in declassified documents, and requesting consideration be given to how researchers would obtain the files other than simply ask for them. My last status update on the appeal indicated work might begin on it in mid to late 2018.<br /><br />For a variety of reasons I'm unfortunately not overly optimistic the appeal will bear the files I seek. I'm considering a few other options, including submitting additional requests which supply FOIA officers with even more documentation of the existence of JSC deception files.. I also think requests on Joint Counterintelligence Center files could be useful. <br /><br />I find the agencies tasked to design and conduct deception ops during both war time and peace time (as documented by James) quite interesting. That's the case for me regardless of what may or may not have taken place at Roswell during the time in question, but it would seem to me, given the 1946-47 date correlations, people with UFO interests would find this worthy of a look prior to dismissing out of hand. If nothing else, it's historically relevant.Jack Brewerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05778028283888927074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-25841794883001331842019-01-11T13:31:32.107-08:002019-01-11T13:31:32.107-08:00Brian B said:
"Just to clarify, what you’re ...Brian B said:<br /><br />"Just to clarify, what you’re saying is that you’ve never heard back from the CIA regarding multiple FOIA requests, correct? Nothing, not even a form letter denying you access?"<br /><br />I submitted an initial FOIA request for the records of the Joint Counterintelligence Center (JCIC) to the CIA and the response that came back was "The National Archives has those records." I checked at the National Archives and they do not.<br /><br />I sent a second FOIA request and this time extended the dates of the request to 1950 as the JCIC was moved to CIA in 1948. That is the request I am still expecting a formal response to.<br /><br />"But if I take your meaning correctly, you haven’t followed up with their public records office in two years?"<br /><br />My second FOIA request was sent in November 2016 and I sent up a follow up letter in July 2017. There is also a hotline you can call for status which I have. Each time the response has been "We are working on it." I am at the point of seeking legal representation since the CIA has been dragging their feet on this.<br />James Carrionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138149666834514145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-34013850194708277342019-01-11T11:27:49.713-08:002019-01-11T11:27:49.713-08:00Despite all the back-and-forth, I do feel Mr. Carr...Despite all the back-and-forth, I do feel Mr. Carrion’s hypothesis has some merit. I don’t say that flippantly.<br /><br />I’m not finished digesting the whole thing, but to understand it you really have to watch some YouTube videos, his presentations and interviews, and actually read his entire manuscript.<br /><br />No, it doesn’t fully explain every last detail to everyones’ satisfaction, and yes there is a heavy reliance on classified materials that can’t be accessed to produce a definitive “smoking gun”.<br /><br />But is he correct? I don’t know. But he’s made at least a few very valid points based on his research.<br /><br />Perhaps most interesting to me is that his thesis seems to irritate both ET’ers and skeptics alike. People just hate it.<br /><br />But maybe that’s a good thing.<br /><br />In truth, after 70+ years of ongoing debate would either side be capable of recognizing the real explanation for Roswell even if it were presented to them as plainly as possible?<br /><br />I wonder.<br /><br />For me there are a few legitimate take-always worth noting:<br /><br />— In 1947 both Soviet and US authorities were desperate to not only develop technological wonder weapons but also to intimidate one another in a game of one up man ship.<br /><br />— Captured German weapons and proposed designs fueled interest in intercontinental missiles and super aircraft that could quickly and easily deliver a surprise attack when strategic bombers were not yet capable of doing so.<br /><br />— Most US Army Air Corps offices associated with research and technology were also charged with carrying out counter-intelligence which no doubt they did despite those efforts remaining classified to this day.<br /><br />While unprovable, Mr. Carrion has also presented some very plausible suppositions which for me carry high probability:<br /><br />— That the USAAF engaged in hoaxing saucer sightings at the same time they also sought to debunk them. Perhaps not in joint unison or coordination, but clearly with an intent to influence the general public and possibly the Soviets.<br /><br />— That such a hoax makes the perfect platform for delivering a strategic deception aimed at influencing the Soviets to ponder if the US was testing advanced aircraft capable of reaching Russian targets with an atomic bomb.<br /><br />— That a “disc” shaped aircraft, or one that consists of a single solid wing as Arnold claimed, would imply use of radical designs reminiscent of those captured from Germany just two years prior.<br /><br />— That Arnold’s sighting is far more complex than previously thought, and that the USAAF may have targeted that area for purposeful counter-intelligence operations aimed at influencing the Soviets via the general public.<br /><br />— The DC5 Arnold spotted was likely a C54 involved in some aspect of the saucer flight he witnessed. This may have been for observation, reconnaissance, monitoring, or even conducting the hoax via unmanned radio controlled drone.<br /><br />— That Arnold’s story changed with his ongoing frustration with the Army’s refusal to actually give any response, and that the Army frequently denied they were testing such weapons while conducting counter intelligence operations to influence people that they were.<br /><br />— That Arnold seemed the perfect patsy, was easily influenced, and simply the perfect medium one could hope for if attempting such a deception.<br /><br />The fact that witnesses on the ground claimed to have seen individual and clustered saucers flying in formation soon after an aircraft flew overhead, that USAAF aircraft were seen tossing out stringed together saucers at altitudes between 5,000 and 10,000 feet while at the same time denying saucers exist (or if they do, pose no threat) makes perfect sense.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-69226839493980601972019-01-11T09:08:47.307-08:002019-01-11T09:08:47.307-08:00All -
The idea of tailless aircraft goes back to ...All -<br /><br />The idea of tailless aircraft goes back to about 1909. The idea of flying wings goes back to the 1930s at least. The Horten Brothers attempted to create a good flying model and had many designs of them. The point is that here, in June, 1947, there is no evidence that any were flying in the northwestern United States. The Flying Flapjack of Navy design only flew on the east coast according to some of the documentation... but the point is, it was not flying over the northwest on June 24 and there weren't nine of them. Just thought I would mention this.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-32580576708854605152019-01-11T07:41:27.594-08:002019-01-11T07:41:27.594-08:00@ James Carrion
Just to clarify, what you’re sayi...@ James Carrion<br /><br />Just to clarify, what you’re saying is that you’ve never heard back from the CIA regarding multiple FOIA requests, correct? Nothing, not even a form letter denying you access?<br /><br />Of course we’re all aware of the shenanigans played with the FOIA process and they’re well documented.<br /><br />But if I take your meaning correctly, you haven’t followed up with their public records office in two years?<br /><br />Obviously they are compelled to give a reason for any delays — complexity, too broad a scope, change in personnel, lost, misplaced, not understood, exemptions, etc.<br /><br />You may never get the information, but they are legally obligated to minimally tell you where your request stands.<br /><br />What did they tell you?Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-10391790842812228712019-01-11T07:33:37.534-08:002019-01-11T07:33:37.534-08:00@ Adam S.
I’m not aware of any “circular aircraft...@ Adam S.<br /><br />I’m not aware of any “circular aircraft” being developed in San Francisco in 1947. As Mr. Carrion states...do you have a “source”? That might be interesting to examine. However it may not mean much of anything either.<br /><br />There certainly were circular aircraft in prototype stage prior to 1947 and during WWII. I’m not certain any of them would’ve intimidated the Soviets. There are others (many on paper) but here’s a sampling of flown examples predating the Roswell event:<br /><br />Arup S-2: 1934-36 (U.S.). This plane looks “saucer shaped” in flight. It was even called a “flying wing” before anything else was.<br />https://youtu.be/_XrSFVDa3mY<br /><br />Flying Flounder: 1939-42 (U.S.). Eschelman built design which also flew.<br />https://youtu.be/Fr5HwRyk020<br /><br />Arthur Sack’s AS-6: 1939-45 (Germany). Built and flown but interestingly isn’t any different than the above despite the hype of “Nazi super weapons”.<br />http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/ARTHUR%20SACK%20A.htm<br /><br />My thoughts (and likely your’s) are the Soviets were not so much concerned about how the aircraft looked but what its capabilities were — specifically if it could drop an atomic bomb over Russian targets from a safe launching point in North America.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-49266971635294560212019-01-11T06:19:50.737-08:002019-01-11T06:19:50.737-08:00Val Miller said:
"The idea that the Russians...Val Miller said:<br /><br />"The idea that the Russians would encrypt publicly available newspaper articles is simply ludicrous. Every embassy has people whose job it is to read newspapers. It's not a secret."<br /><br />I feel like I am wasting my time here when folks post comments who obviously haven't bothered to read the book. <br /><br />If Val had bothered to read the book, than he would have found out that:<br /><br />1. The media was a source of open intelligence for the Russians in 1947<br /><br />2. If the media reported something of intelligence value, Russian intelligence agents in the U.S. had very limited ways of sending that information back to Moscow. They could either send a human back which would take days, send it in the diplomatic pouch which would take days or send it via encrypted commercial telegraph which would take minutes.<br /><br />3. The nature of the 1947 flying saucer stories were close to Stalin's heart as he didn't see an ET signature but a secret American weapon, so stories of that nature would be required to be urgently sent back to Moscow - hence the encrypted telegraph - and the codebreaking goals of the deception.<br /><br />Please have the courtesy before posting of first reading the book that I spent 10 years researching and hundreds of hours writing and have offered free of charge. It is the least you can do.James Carrionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138149666834514145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-52103239504060953072019-01-10T19:11:24.647-08:002019-01-10T19:11:24.647-08:00The idea that the Russians would encrypt publicly ...The idea that the Russians would encrypt publicly available newspaper articles is simply ludicrous. Every embassy has people whose job it is to read newspapers. It's not a secret.Val Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05144332991894824482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-30569005008854554472019-01-09T06:42:53.032-08:002019-01-09T06:42:53.032-08:00cda says:
"In the meantime I suggest Mr Carr...cda says:<br /><br />"In the meantime I suggest Mr Carrion produces the documentation that undoubtedly exists (if he is right) for his great thesis that the 1947 wave was all part of a grand deception by the US against the Soviets. Remember: each successive day & week that passes without this documentation appearing reduces even further the probability that he is right."<br /><br />It appears you don't have a clue how historical research works and your comment about each passing day reducing the possibility of my hypothesis being viable is ludicrous. Start with the nature of the data - it is security classified. If the U.S. Government blanket declassified ALL classified data from 1945 - 1948, then it would be a simple matter of spending enough time in Government archives reviewing the declassified data to be able to either substantiate or eliminate the hypothesis. That is not the reality.<br /><br />You can sit in your pessimist armchair and pontificate and make demands but that does not change the nature of the issue. Imagine if I took the same position on any number of once classified operations that we only learned about decades later after declassification took place. <br /><br />For example, if I had written a book in 1947 about the WW2 Ghost Army, claiming the U.S. practiced strategic deception during WW2, but could cite no official documentation to back up the hypothesis, because that data was still classified...historians would have ignored the book, and others would wring their hands and cry "conspiracy". James Carrionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138149666834514145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-37641775023165069902019-01-09T05:23:37.814-08:002019-01-09T05:23:37.814-08:00Adam S. said:
"I emphasize Tsunami Bomb bec...Adam S. said: <br /><br />"I emphasize Tsunami Bomb because I feel the real purpose of the project is what is hinted at in the articles below and that the link to the "Flying Discs" is tenuous."<br /><br />Here's an article that makes the connection:<br /><br />Alton Evening Telegraph - June 14, 1947<br /><br />Savant Hints Weapon is Rocket Bomb Type<br />Sydney, Australia - (AP) Professor W. A. Miller of the Sydney university civil engineering department Saturday said a new secret weapon mentioned in Auckland, N.Z. reports "might be in the nature of an airborne missile such as the German rocket bomb."<br /><br />Miller emphasize to reporters however, that he himself had received no indication of the nature of the project and that he mad the comment only because he knew Prof. David James Leech, Auckland to have "an expert knowledge of and enthusiasm for aerodynamics."James Carrionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138149666834514145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-67741109509161266542019-01-09T03:05:39.424-08:002019-01-09T03:05:39.424-08:00Anthony Mugan & James Carrion:
There are no &...Anthony Mugan & James Carrion:<br /><br />There are no 'heroes' in ufology. There are plenty of suckers but certainly no heroes. If there were, the UK heroes would by now have either got knighthoods or damehoods. Similar honors exist in the US, surely? No such honors have been given, to my knowledge. One day, maybe (and it is a very big 'maybe') someone will be officially honoured "for services to ufology". <br /><br />In the meantime I suggest Mr Carrion produces the documentation that undoubtedly exists (if he is right) for his great thesis that the 1947 wave was all part of a grand deception by the US against the Soviets. Remember: each successive day & week that passes without this documentation appearing reduces even further the probability that he is right. But yes, he may STILL have a minute chance of being correct in his conjecture. The ETHers also have a minute chance of being right, but after 72 years it is getting VERY close to absolute zero. <br /><br />But that's what ufology is all about, isn't it?cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-75898281246442848572019-01-08T22:12:19.131-08:002019-01-08T22:12:19.131-08:00June 14, 1947 - Indiana Evening Gazette
“New Weapo...June 14, 1947 - Indiana Evening Gazette<br />“New Weapon May Be Airborne”<br />Miller said Leech in both aerodynamic and hydrodynamics had made a great contribution<br />to the work of Sydney University’s Civil Engineering Department before he went to New<br />Zealand in 1939.<br />In Auckland today, Professor Leech said he was ―surprised‖ to hear that a London<br />newspaper headline had stated that the atomic bomb had been rendered obsolete, but<br />made no further comment.<br /><br />June 14, 1947 - Daily Inter Lake<br />"Snodgrass gave the only hint as to the nature of the weapon as he disclosed its<br />development started after American forces landed on Tarawa Island in the Pacific. He<br />turned to a reporter and said: ―remember there was heavy loss of life." The newsmen<br />asked if the weapon had anything to do with the casualties or some military problem<br />encountered on the Island and Snodgrass replied: "Could be."<br />Snodgrass who is chief engineer of the motion picture sound division at the DaytonACME CO., a Cincinnati consultant engineering firm, said he joined British and New<br />Zealand scientists in the development of the weapon while he was a civilian attached to<br />the National Defense Research Council. Prof. Leech headed the project, he added.<br />He said the weapon was conceived by the British although United States naval officers<br />were not enthusiastic the British pressed the work, first on an obscure Pacific Islands."<br /><br />---<br /><br />So, there you go. I could see a bait here, but the language: Pacific Islands, Coastal Regions, rival the atom bomb in power (like one would excpect from a Tsunami Bomb). These just strike me as in-line with the actual project...not the "flying discs" which were reported a little later.<br /><br />Adam S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11934830683869908953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-12822167423455932262019-01-08T22:11:44.419-08:002019-01-08T22:11:44.419-08:00I thought I would paste some of the news articles ...I thought I would paste some of the news articles Mr. Carrion collected on Project Seal, just for ease of access for everyone. I'm quoting these out of his archived MUFON Symposium I found on the net, so please Mr. Carrion add to these if there are any updates...<br /><br />http://scilib.ucsd.edu/sio/hist/Carrion_New%20Avenues.pdf<br /><br />Now, before I paste the news articles, I want to emphasize that Project Seal was an attempt to create a Tsunami Bomb (yep, seriously!). The declassifed report can be found on scrib if anyone is interested. <br /><br />https://www.scribd.com/document/143591182/The-Final-Report-of-Project-Seal-1950<br /><br />I emphasize Tsunami Bomb because I feel the real purpose of the project is what is hinted at in the articles below and that the link to the "Flying Discs" is tenuous.<br /><br />Apologies for any formatting errors. Also, this will be spread across two comments due to the character limit on blogger....<br /><br />June 13, 1947 - Amarillo Daily News:<br />" Science Tries for New Weapon Matching Atom Bomb in Power”<br />The weapon did not reach the stage of practical application during the war, but work still<br />is being pursued in the strictest secrecy by scientists in the United States, Britain and<br />New Zealand. No hint of the details of the weapon has been revealed but it is stated that<br />one means of application would have some similarity to one method of using the atomic<br />bomb. The project was to have been carried out in Florida but was moved to New Zealand and<br />Pacific areas owing to the fears of espionage. Leech was selected to lead the research<br />because he had previously done work distantly related. He had a team of 170 American<br />and New Zealand experts, most of whom were given no idea of the ultimate objective, for<br />security reasons."<br /><br /> June 14, 1947 - Alton Evening Telegraph:<br />“U.S. Scientist Backs Secret Weapon Tale”<br />The Herald Tribune quotes a 39-year old American scientist it said shared in the<br />development of the secret Anglo-American weapon reported from New Zealand as<br />saying that the weapon exists and that first reports although exaggerated, are substantially<br />true. The scientist, James Marion Snodgrass of Cincinnati, is further quoted as saying that<br />the weapon was not connected in any way with the atom bomb and that it was not a<br />biological weapon.<br />Existence of the weapon first was reported by Prof. T. D. J Leech of New Zealand. Later<br />dispatches mentioned a Prof. J. M Snodgrass of the University of California as a coworker.<br />Original reports said the secret weapon outrivaled the atom bomb. The Herald Tribune<br />says it reached Snodgrass in Cincinnati and quoted him as saying that he worked on the <br />229 weapon in New Zealand and that he believed it to be a weapon of tremendous importance.<br />"But farther than that he would not go," the paper says. "He would not discuss its nature<br />or whether it was for use against personnel or vessels."<br />The Herald Tribune quotes Snodgrass as saying the Navy holds all reports on it<br />"although he recalled having spoken to Dr. Vannevar Bush, wartime scientific leader<br />about it." <br /><br />June 14, 1947 - Charleston Daily Gazette<br />"Radiation May be Factor in Latest Secret Weapon”<br />There is one clue in the reports of the secret Anglo-American weapon said to outrival the<br />atom bomb as credited today to Prof. T. D. J. Leech in New Zealand. That clue points to<br />a ray or radiation of some sort. The sentence reads "One means of application would have<br />some similarity to one method of using the atomic bomb."<br />Adam S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11934830683869908953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-20768745492508725392019-01-08T19:10:20.149-08:002019-01-08T19:10:20.149-08:00When I spoke of "no reference" to Roswel...When I spoke of "no reference" to Roswell, I was speaking in the sense of there being no widespread mention of the subject in any of the wide range of areas I looked to, There could have been largely unacknowledged, unnoticed mentionings in a few venues, but, in general, no recognition that the event even took place. Even in material by individuals who covered the subject of UFO's very determinedly. And, the fact is, that is eminently suspicious! Since when is there any case concerning UFO's that did not get great attention from, among others, enthusiasts, aficionados, buffs? Frankly, it sounds strange, if not suspicious, that anything even approaching a story of a crashed UFO would take thirty years of more to become a major point of discussion in ufology.julianpenrodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10179968980379116942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-92213160047912204432019-01-08T09:09:32.281-08:002019-01-08T09:09:32.281-08:00Anthony Mugan said:
"Mr. Carrion's propo...Anthony Mugan said:<br /><br />"Mr. Carrion's proposal, that the 1947 UFO wave was a deception operation staged by US intelligence services, runs counter to ALL the documentary evidence we now have access to regarding the response of the US military and intelligence communities to the UFO phenomena in that time period. The documentary record clearly indicates sober concern and reflects the development of the internal debate and policy position in that time period."<br /><br />No it doesn't. I have shown in the book that the responses of the high US military brass to the widespread aerial incursions over the United States in 1947 during heightened tensions with Soviet Russia, to be completely out of character. Lower ranked staff discussed this odd response among themselves and with their FBI liaison. What is your explanation for this lack of defensive response? Your documentation please.<br /><br />Anthony Mugan said:<br />No serious student of the history of that time period could possibly take Mr Carrion's suggestion seriously.<br /><br />Serious student? Do you mean Ufologist? Professional Debunker? Sociologist? Cold War historian? Intelligence Historian? I have no illusions of changing the minds of die hard believers or die hard UFO skeptics, but instead of those who have have the critical reasoning skills to reject your summary dismissal that has no basis and will take the time to not only read the book but the underlying documentation. <br /><br />Anthony Mugan said:<br />"In itself this proposal is just yet another piece of the annoying nonsense that gets in the way of a serious discussion of this subject on a par with contactees, the Roswell Slides etc. etc. etc. On its own it is perhaps relatively trivial as it is so clearly wrong serious students of the subjects will quickly discount it." <br /><br />Here you cite again "serious students". Please quantity who you speak of and if you count yourself as one of those serious students. While you are at it, please provide the following:<br /><br />- Your professional line of work<br />- Amount of time you have spent in a Government archive searching for UFO related data<br />- What qualifies you as a serious student of this subject?<br />- Who else you count as a serious student?<br /><br />Anthony Mugan said:<br />"Somewhat more concerning, however, is that it fits into an wider vulnerability in out society for a proportion of the population to be taken in by persuasively presented nonsense...particularly when the nonsense is mixed in with a certain amount of actual factual information (even if irrelevant, as in this case) and in an entertaining style. That is however a much wider issue for out society and we aren't go to sort it out here, and this particular example is clearly a symptom rather than a cause."<br /><br />Persuasively presented nonsense? Is that the same as "alternative facts"? Our society is not vulnerable to logically presented and documented evidence. It is vulnerable to:<br />- Those who spout data as if it is factual but have no supporting evidence<br />- Those who promote knowingly false narratives as fact<br />- Those who sensationalize events and perpetuate mysteries<br />- Those who ignore data - I document many instances in my book of important data that Ufologists and debunkers have ignored for years because it doesn't fit their pet theories<br /><br />Anthony Mugan said:<br />"The whole subject of UFOS is largely an offshoot of the entertainment industry and has been for many years, with a small number of honourable exceptions. Caveat emptor!"<br />"<br />And who would those honorable exceptions be that hold the gold standard for you? Please list them. Would love to see who your heroes are on this subject.James Carrionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138149666834514145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-91059809136803742432019-01-08T02:09:38.268-08:002019-01-08T02:09:38.268-08:00Mr. Carrion's proposal, that the 1947 UFO wave...Mr. Carrion's proposal, that the 1947 UFO wave was a deception operation staged by US intelligence services, runs counter to ALL the documentary evidence we now have access to regarding the response of the US military and intelligence communities to the UFO phenomena in that time period. The documentary record clearly indicates sober concern and reflects the development of the internal debate and policy position in that time period.<br /><br />No serious student of the history of that time period could possibly take Mr Carrion's suggestion seriously.<br /><br />In itself this proposal is just yet another piece of the annoying nonsense that gets in the way of a serious discussion of this subject on a par with contactees, the Roswell Slides etc. etc. etc. On its own it is perhaps relatively trivial as it is so clearly wrong serious students of the subjects will quickly discount it. <br /><br />Somewhat more concerning, however, is that it fits into an wider vulnerability in out society for a proportion of the population to be taken in by persuasively presented nonsense...particularly when the nonsense is mixed in with a certain amount of actual factual information (even if irrelevant, as in this case) and in an entertaining style. That is however a much wider issue for out society and we aren't go to sort it out here, and this particular example is clearly a symptom rather than a cause.<br /><br />The whole subject of UFOS is largely an offshoot of the entertainment industry and has been for many years, with a small number of honourable exceptions. Caveat emptor!<br /><br /><br /><br />Anthony Muganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08195694902712869724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-79099923658147598882019-01-07T02:54:48.992-08:002019-01-07T02:54:48.992-08:00Julianpenrod:
The Roswell story only became '...Julianpenrod:<br /><br />The Roswell story only became 'big news' in 1980 when Bill Moore and Charles Berlitz published their book THE ROSWELL INCIDENT. This came a year after the same authors published THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT which, so to speak, set them up as writers of sensational books. Hence THE ROSWELL INCIDENT was a big best seller. Kevin is right that there were earlier mentions of Roswell, but these were trivial by comparison with the book. Stringfield's 1978 MUFON Symposium effort was only a brief account of it among numerous 'crashed saucer' tales he presented at that symposium. Stringfield had spoken on the phone to Marcel a few weeks after Stan Friedman had, and had learned more or less the same story. <br /><br />It was following the Berlitz-Moore book that others began their own investigations of Roswell, and the total number of writers on it now probably exceeds 50. I couldn't possibly name them all. Hence an insignificant event became, after 1980, a world-wide sensation. Radio, TV and the movie industry picked it up and all hell broke loose. Meanwhile the scientific world stuck up two fingers at it all and carried on as usual.cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-25836394976634840252019-01-06T21:35:07.263-08:002019-01-06T21:35:07.263-08:00James Carrion wrote:
“Everyone wants a smoking gu...James Carrion wrote:<br /><br />“Everyone wants a smoking gun, i.e. "show me the document that states that Project Seal was used as part of the Roswell Deception to promote a U.S. aerial super weapon." Again, if such a document existed, I could read about this deception in a hundred Cold War books at Barnes and Noble. If such a document exists, then it is still highly classified. That does not prevent the formation of a hypothesis to explain the events of 1947 as strategic deception. The problem with trying to discuss this hypothesis with a layperson is that they have a difficult time conceptualizing the nature of strategic deception. If you want to consider that my hypothesis has a basis, then you need to understand the deception precedent set in WW2. Read Deception 101 and The Deceivers. They will open your eyes to a realm of possibilities and how deep human deception can go when a war (hot or cold) is being waged.”<br /><br />Well, the idea of deception in warfare was first quoted by Sun Tzu and probably goes all the way back to when Homo sapiens were first throwing rocks and spears against each other. As I have stated, I don’t have any issue with the hypothesis your presenting, I just don’t think the evidence that we currently have firmly supports it. I can tell you’re passionate about it, I just am not convinced.<br /><br />Is it more believable than ET craft flying around…yes, it is. But, is it more probable than two other theories about that summer: <br /><br />1) There was an experimental craft or crafts or missiles (probably radio controlled) flying around which were actually being witnessed by citizens. OR<br />2) A case of war nerves and/or common misidentifications, which includes the Arnold sighting. <br /><br />That said, there IS some data which make me wonder if you are on to something, For instance:<br /><br />1) The document where the Army tells the FBI it was throwing discs out of an airplane. Operationally, I just can’t think of any reason for them to be doing this other than maybe some form of Chaff or radar testing, but I have never heard of a Chaff test being conducted with “discs”. So, what were they doing???<br /><br />2) In “Alfred Loedding & The Great Flying Saucer Wave of 1947”, the authors plot all the reported sightings from that summer on a map of the United States. The sightings are plotted for the week that they occur. For the majority of the Summer, these points are fairly distributed over the continental US, except for a week or two during the end of June where they strongly cluster around the Pacific Northwest. And, I emphasize…. almost ALL of the points are just in that geographic area during that week or two.<br /> - There are several possible explanations for this of course. But, it could also show if the “deception planners” did create a honeypot. Just a thought anyway. <br /><br /><br /><br />Adam S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11934830683869908953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-90679741787229525992019-01-06T13:31:16.356-08:002019-01-06T13:31:16.356-08:00William Strathman:
"Seems to me the Arnold s...William Strathman:<br /><br />"Seems to me the Arnold sighting could in no way be mistaken for the Silbervogel by anyone familiar with Sänger's concept."<br /><br />The only person who the deceivers needed to convince was Stalin as he was obsessed with Sanger's weapon. So let's paint the picture:<br /><br />1. Unknown high speed aerial objects being seen all over the United States in 1947 (alluding to incredible range as well).<br />2. A CalTech scientist leaking to the press that the objects used jet propelled assistance similar to what the Sanger weapon used<br />3. A described motion similar to the Sanger weapon<br /><br />As I pointed out in my book, once you find your deception target's prejudicial triggers, you don't need to provide exact data to get them to swallow a deception. Their prejudice will make them ignore red flags and fill in gaps to reach their preconceived beliefs.<br /><br />Case in point, the 2016 U.S. Presidential election - all of the social media ads that the Russians were paying for didn't need to make any logical sense, they pressed the prejudicial buttons of many Americans who were "deceived" into voting for the candidate Russia wanted.James Carrionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13138149666834514145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-67616995158242709702019-01-06T13:12:12.838-08:002019-01-06T13:12:12.838-08:00julianpenrod -
Just because you heard nothing abo...julianpenrod -<br /><br />Just because you heard nothing about Roswell prior to the 1980s doesn't meant that there were no references to it. The first thing you must understand is that Scully's Behind the Flying Saucers was revealed to be a hoax by J.P. Cahn in the early 1950s and most of those researching UFOs rejected, out of hand, any tale that referred to a saucer crash. Len Stringfield reversed that and told, in his 1978 MUFON Symposium presentation of Jesse Marcel's story of a UFO crash.<br /><br />That isn't the first reference, however. Frank Edwards, in his 1966 book, Flying Saucers - Serious Business, reported on the Roswell crash, even mentioning the town. He got nearly every fact wrong, but he did report it in his book.<br /><br />In some of those earlier mentions, the writer believed that the Roswell crash to be a hoax, but that doesn't change the fact that it was discussed.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-44172641694433635382019-01-06T10:08:57.769-08:002019-01-06T10:08:57.769-08:00A point that is significant.
I never heard of... A point that is significant.<br /> I never heard of Roswell before the mid Eighties.<br /> I read and looked at a great many things about UFO's. Paperbacks about The Devil's Triangle, Ancient Astronauts, generally strange events. I looked at comic book series about UFO's such as those put out by Gold Key and Dell. I watched televisions series like “Project U.F.O.” I heard of Kenneth Arnold, Project Sign, Project Blue Book, Project Grudge, Lonny Zamora, The Flatwoods Monster, Betty and Barney Hill, the Mantell Incident, the Lubbock Lights, “Foo Fighters”. In none of that, though, did I see or hear anything about Roswell, New Mexico! It can be said that it sounds for all the world like a “false flag” operation, engineered history to catch the imagination of unthinking UFO enthusiasts and lead them away from the truth. I should mention that I first heard of Area 51 at around that time, too.<br /> And this doesn't seem to be the only such case.<br /> At Christmas, so many now bring up the “Yes, Virginia” letter. But, although it was supposedly written in the later 1800's, I see no reference to it in any book or movie or such before the 1960's. I have looked through “treasuries” and collections of poems, stories, songs about Christmas going back to the 1920's. I've seen many movies concerning Christmas. In what I saw of “The Man Who Came To Dinner”, “Christmas In Connecticut”, “Holiday Inn”, “The Bishop's Wife”, I saw no reference. I never heard of it being on any Perry Como or Andy Williams Christmas specials. It looks very much as if the “Yes, Virginia” letter is also manufactured “history”.<br /> Add such things, too, as the “Miracle of Fatima”. The story there always gets more complicated and, at least to an extent, stranger. The “secrets” supposedly given to the children were never mentioned in early renditions. Now, they saw an angel appeared to the children the day before the first apparition and told them it would occur, and even that, a year before, an angel appeared to the children and the parish priest and participated in a Mass in the woods with them.<br /> And there doesn't seem a single biography show on television that doesn't include material not seen before, or that doesn't fail to include material seen before.<br /> It's a very good question how much of anything provided generally, anymore, can be trusted.julianpenrodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04749223311885370528noreply@blogger.com