tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post8266140148326587285..comments2024-03-18T16:51:50.688-07:00Comments on A Different Perspective: Colonel Thomas Ferebee and the Roswell CrashKRandlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comBlogger53125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-67870355562936222152016-11-27T19:34:25.550-08:002016-11-27T19:34:25.550-08:00It seems almost impossible that this would have be...It seems almost impossible that this would have been overlooked, but I see no mention of it in the article or comments, so... Col. Thomas Ferebee was the bombardier from the Enola Gay, who aimed the bomb that laid waste to Hiroshima. He was involved in the Manhattan Project when the mere existence of it was one of the nation's greatest secrets. He's not just your average AAF colonel.Ostrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02256138692870320291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-23073981362269494242015-04-19T04:04:34.612-07:002015-04-19T04:04:34.612-07:00Kevin:
Quite right, it wasn't. The irony of i...Kevin:<br /><br />Quite right, it wasn't. The irony of it is that in my deleted post I actually took your side and told off someone else for deviating from the topic!<br /><br />So now you can have a light chuckle before deleting this posting too. Anyway, I'll shut up now.cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-24807599753615044162015-04-18T15:00:12.505-07:002015-04-18T15:00:12.505-07:00CDA -
Your comment was not relevant to the origin...CDA -<br /><br />Your comment was not relevant to the original post.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-61238545177041146002015-04-18T08:51:43.936-07:002015-04-18T08:51:43.936-07:00Brian -
I now suspect you are a troll who attempt...Brian -<br /><br />I now suspect you are a troll who attempts to hijack discussions. This was about Thomas Ferebee and all other conversation ends now.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-79537625475967619612015-04-17T23:46:02.812-07:002015-04-17T23:46:02.812-07:00Larry H: Now who's really blowing smoke? You c...Larry H: Now who's really blowing smoke? You claim that I am purely speculating? Let's take a look. You said:<br /><br />"I subscribe to Occam's Razor and the simple explanation is these craft didn't "manipulate the fabricate of space" they were brought here by other craft and were probes, simple expendable research probes. I have never believed that crashed ETC flew across the vastness of space only to crash here. But expendable probes brought here by craft that could "manipulate the fabric of space" is reasonable and logical."<br /><br />>> That is PURE speculation. Not a shred if any proof of anything you just said being real or demonstrated ever. Don't point the finger of speculation at me when these "wild ideas" have no basis in fact. That's your best guess - and nothing but a guess.<br /><br />"It is important to think outside the box my friend."<br /><br />>> I agree, but what you accept as legitimate "out of the box thinking" IS ONLY thinking that supports the ETH. Anything that is offered as potential explanations that clear up gray zones, but don't fit the ETH, is immediately attacked and rejected. Just look at the last string of rebuttals from both you and Kevin. You truly have no room for out of the box thinking. If you did you would walk your talk.<br /><br />And Kevin.... You have a passion for avoiding answers to questions that bring attention to some of your work. And a habit of pointing out what you claim are errors of others while forgetting your own. Let's take a look:<br /><br />1) UFO Crash at Roswell, you claim the crash took place on July 2nd and was located on the Foster Ranch, but then you state in The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell that the crash takes place on July 5th and is located just North of Roswell on what was then the McKnight Ranch. You changed your story...<br /><br />2) Ragsdale and Truelove testimony - He said they were in a car - you changed their story to say they were in a WW2 jeep and also changed it into a "wild night with lightning and thunder; a 30 to 40 mile an hour wind driving dust and dirt." You changed the facts and the details of a witness's testimony...<br /><br />3) Omni Magazine - Your 1995 letter - You state "It is amazing to me that so many rumors fill the air. Now we are being told that Don is a letter carrier… Of course, this rumor is no more true than the Gerald Anderson story." Then you say "I had believed that his lying related only to his personal life. Now I learn that it doesn't ....That said, let me now point out that I do not now believe anything that Schmitt says and neither should you…". You knowingly chose to work with a guy who you knew lied about his personal life, and defended him knowing that, yet dare to challenge me and others about research, facts, and conclusions?<br /><br />Need I go on Kevin?<br />Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-8648250796832210442015-04-17T22:19:15.663-07:002015-04-17T22:19:15.663-07:00AI12 - Actually there is some speculation (not fro...AI12 - Actually there is some speculation (not from me) that the material actually wasn't shipped anywhere.<br /><br />First hand witnesses claim material that resembles, if not directly identical to, polyethylene, parchment paper, string, Bakelite, tape and foil with memory type properties.<br /><br />Kevin and friends claim that it was alien hardware, and despite there being some military men that told Marcel (when it was first brought in) that it was a balloon, he states they had nothing to add or knew nothing more about the things he was interested in, so he and Don chose not to highlight them in detail or at all.<br /><br />Kevin maintains that the balloon material in Ramey's office was neoprene, which it was, but that it couldn't have been polyethylene that they found, because the real alien debris was swapped out. He backs that up by claiming Moore accurately reported the launch of a neoprene balloon array, but maintains that Moore deliberately fudged his data much later as part of the USAF grand conspiracy.<br /><br />Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-21214545039729967812015-04-17T18:59:53.320-07:002015-04-17T18:59:53.320-07:00Brian:
AI12's comment is spot on. Why ship un...Brian:<br /><br />AI12's comment is spot on. Why ship unclassified junk to Washington or Wright-Pat? Throw it in a dumpster or whatever they had then. Give me one solid report that Marcel or anyone else found a vacuum tube or any 1940's era electronic equipment in the Foster Ranch debris and I'll reconsider my position. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12035379587054006528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-88311840322936875792015-04-17T18:04:48.796-07:002015-04-17T18:04:48.796-07:00Brian.
Why then would it be nessesary to "sh...Brian.<br /><br />Why then would it be nessesary to "ship off the real debris" debris such as Balsa, sticks, rubber, a balloon is just a balloon, mogul or otherwise.<br /><br />Would it really be prudent to ship this junk off in bombers and then straight to Wright Field for analysis ( since they ought to know what this junk is ) <br /><br />Project Mogul was classified but the materials used wasnt and so i dont understand why they would need to be shipped to Wright Field.Al12https://www.blogger.com/profile/04587268951658892242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-71414977094547749542015-04-17T18:02:53.028-07:002015-04-17T18:02:53.028-07:00Brian:
"Simplest explanation is usually the ...Brian:<br /><br />"Simplest explanation is usually the right explanation... They described what they really saw. Please explain how an advanced intelligence could possibly manipulate the fabric of space to get here built in a spacecraft made of materials like that, or even something that looked like that?" <br /><br />I subscribe to Occam's Razor and the simple explanation is these craft didn't "manipulate the fabricate of space" they were brought here by other craft and were probes, simple expendable research probes. I have never believed that crashed ETC flew across the vastness of space only to crash here. But expendable probes brought here by craft that could "manipulate the fabric of space" is reasonable and logical. It is important to think outside the box my friend.<br /><br />As for Moore, he was a leader in balloon research and development for high altitude research. He was highly regarded until his death in 2010. His efforts to debunk Roswell with questionable means is, in my opinion, a blemish on a fine career. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12035379587054006528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-8251790612769111752015-04-17T17:44:03.883-07:002015-04-17T17:44:03.883-07:00"5) His data was forced by him to fit landing..."5) His data was forced by him to fit landing area near Roswell - maybe, but maybe he is t that great with math anyway or didn't care to do it properly for other reasons."<br /><br />Wild speculation that is not backed up by any facts… Seriously, he might have been bad at math? <br /><br />"6) To verify neoprene vs polyethylene flights, has anyone ever interviewed anyone else on the NYU team to verify Moore's notes on types?"<br /><br />These weren’t Moore’s notes but Crary’s. Other documentation about the balloon flights and the acquisition of the equipment is spelled out in the reports, copies of which were published in the massive Air Force report on Roswell. Others involved were, in fact, interviewed.<br /><br />"7) His log book is a record of attempted official flights - there isn't anything ruling out that they didn't launch some unofficial polyethelne balloons without the white box but with battery box attached as pre-flight trial runs with the new material."<br /><br />I don’t even know what this means… except all the data show that the polyethylene didn’t arrived until July, too late for the June 4 launch. You can’t just make up something to fit your scenario without some sort of evidence, even if it is thin. This is wild, unfounded speculation.<br /><br />"8) Bear in mind these are college students, not Q clearance military personnel."<br /><br />“Q” clearances have nothing to do with it. It is clear that they knew the name of the project in 1947 since they used it in the field notes and documentation. The Air Force report said, “Professor Moore and certain other members of the group were aware of the actual purpose of the project but they did not know of the project nickname at the time.” So you point sinks here because Moore, without a “Q” clearance did know the purpose, according to him, he just didn’t know the project name… which clearly was not classified.<br /><br />"9) What are the chances that a July 1-2 polyethelne unofficial test simy got caught up in the thunderstorm and was forced down 12 hours after launch? In such a case they may not have recorded it or cared to go look for it because it wasn't an official flight with full equipment?"<br /><br />What is your evidence for this wild speculation…there is nothing to suggest this and the records seem to indicate that the polyethylene did not arrive until later.<br /><br />None of your points are valid. They are just invention to prop up a weak theory… I have looked into this in depth, as I have other ideas in an attempt to learn what fell at Roswell… and I will note again that the debris photographed in Ramey’s office is not a polyethylene balloon but a neoprene balloon and a badly degraded rawin radar reflector.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-2741295034385732332015-04-17T17:43:53.836-07:002015-04-17T17:43:53.836-07:00Brian –
Thank you for proving that you just make ...Brian –<br /><br />Thank you for proving that you just make stuff up when it doesn’t fit into your world view. So, let’s look at your thoughts.<br /><br />Brian wrote:<br /><br />"So here are my thoughts on the debris not matching a Mogul neoprene array launched early June.<br /><br />1) It's pretty clear that Charles Moore didn't keep great records to begin with / even Ufologists agree on that.<br /><br />"Well, we might agree except that the field notes and diary were kept by Dr. Albert Crary, the leader in New Mexico. The records are, for the most part clear… the areas of dispute are those identified by Moore decades after the events to support his claims.<br /><br />"2) He was a early 20's grad student - if you have ever worked with grad students you may recall that not everyone documents properly - many make mistakes or don't recall accurately what they did. Furthermore not everyone is a great student either meaning I would not consider Moore an impeccable scientist extrodinare at that time of his life."<br /><br />Again, the records were kept by Crary and not Moore so all this is irrelevant and your assessment of Moore at this time of his life is equally irrelevant.<br /><br />"3) Sure - he has changed his story and reasoning on things, but only in response to changing details brought forth by Ufologists. The gouge for example is one place he states that his balloons couldn't have done that - well the gouge has never been proven and even Marcel and Brazil never said there was one, so Moore's response has to be taken in the context of bad information given to him."<br /> <br />Really, you want to stick with this reasoning? Moore changed the time of the June 4 launch of a cluster of balloons to 2:30 or 3:00 in the morning because of a weather front that passed through Alamogordo about dawn that changed the weather dynamics and his speculative balloon flight was in error… The field notes and diary make it clear that the launch was canceled and then the cluster of balloons was launched some time later. The record suggests Flight No. 4 was canceled about dawn and the cluster would therefore have been launched later.<br /><br />"4) Ufologists claim that he and the NYU team had "great UFO sightings" only to be ignored by the military - probably true - and that he was miffed as a result. But then they claim he deliberately fudged his date to support the direction of Flight 4, to help the military in their coverup - sounds contradictory to me. Can't have it both ways."<br /><br />Moore’s sighting was not ignored by the military and was carried by Project Blue Book as an “unidentified.” He was miffed at the guys in Roswell who told him and his colleagues that they didn’t have time for a bunch of “college boys.” The records, however, suggest that Moore might have been the only one who had this problem. Crary talks of refueling at the base as they surveyed the area. A week later, Moore claims that he was denied entry to the base. Your point seems to be untrue.<br /><br />KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-32233113430376393912015-04-17T16:07:16.025-07:002015-04-17T16:07:16.025-07:00Larry - did you read my comment? The link is what ...Larry - did you read my comment? The link is what your witnesses said, not me, and yes you have had them for a long time. But read their initial comments for what they said, not what they didn't say. Sticks, balsa, bakelite, rubber etc. is what they described. I know what you're thinking..."That's the best description they could give for off world materials that were mysterious"... Right. How is that "my smoke and mirrors?" Simplest explanation is usually the right explanation... They described what they really saw. Please explain how an advanced intelligence could possibly manipulate the fabric of space to get here built in a spacecraft made of materials like that, or even something that looked like that? <br /><br />Regarding Moore, what I said was you should indeed bank on the fact he made errors in his logs (something Ufologists all claim), and if he did, those errors may account for why he didn't properly log correctly a polyethelyne rather than neoprene balloon or even another sent up without equipment. How is that hard to understand?. <br /><br />I never said all of the equipment was there, only the battery box Marcel and Brazel said they found (they called it a small black box). For all anyone knows if the array did have the white sound detecting box it could have been missing in another location or what you claim is the "crash site".<br /><br />Did Ramey lie and also switch material in Fort Worth? Yes he probably did and placed a common weather balloon of neoprene on the floor. Why? He had orders to cover the real story (Mogul) with a common weather balloon and ship the real debris. He followed orders.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-73683710406416307222015-04-17T14:51:18.783-07:002015-04-17T14:51:18.783-07:00I'm going to make this as quick as possible an...I'm going to make this as quick as possible and then I'm through with it.<br /><br />Brian: You are using smoke and mirrors to make your case and it isn't working. I simply stated that Dr. Charles Moore had seen a UFO or saucer while watching a balloon flight and filed a report that was debunked by the AF. You went into a long discourse to discredit Moore that had nothing to do with the simple point I made. Perhaps if I had challenged Moors attempt at debunking Roswell, which he did, you would be supporting him.<br /><br />As far a the link you added. You've got me scratching my head as to why you put that up. It's the same data we've had for years. It doesn't support your sticks and rubber thesis it discredits it. "Beams like balsa wood that can't be cut, bent or burned." My wife has a bowl full of alabaster eggs, they look like eggs but I sure wouldn't try to eat one.<br /><br />One other thing. Where is the radio equipment that Marcel would have been so familiar with? The Vacuum tubes, circuit boards, batteries, microphones etc. This is the heart of the Mogul Project and has anyone at any time mentioned this type of material in the debris?<br /><br />CDA:<br /><br />Christopher, I'll also try to make this brief. Marcel told his son, his wife and at least one HAM buddy who told Friedman about Marcel in the late 1970's. Remember, Stan found him, Marcel didn't contact Friedman. As far as feeling foolish, what about Blanchard? He went on to become a full four star.<br /><br />The number of people who were told to keep their mouths shut could fill a phone book.<br /><br />One final thing, as I said to Brian, in all the debris discussed, where was the heart of Project Mogul, the 1940's era radio equipment?<br /><br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12035379587054006528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-58357274052926455012015-04-17T04:05:40.805-07:002015-04-17T04:05:40.805-07:00Larry H:
There is no telling what Marcel thought ...Larry H:<br /><br />There is no telling what Marcel thought or said at the time - none at all. This is because ALL quotes from Marcel (yes every one) are taken from what he told investigators, i.e. Moore, Friedman and others 30+ years afterwards.<br /><br />We simply do not know any thoughts or ideas that Marcel had in '47, because there are no quotes from him at that time. He did say a few things at Fort Worth about his birthplace and perhaps VERY little about himself. Of course the conspiracists insist he was told to keep his mouth shut. Far more likely is that he kept silent to avoid looking a bit foolish at his seeming failure to identify a shattered balloon/radar target device).<br /><br />And remember that he and Brazel are quoted in the RDR as trying to form a kite out of the material. Not the sort of activity you would do if you ever suspected it was the remains of an ET craft. (And Brazel would hardly have shoved bits of the debris under some brush if HE had such thoughts either!)cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-91375897664236321922015-04-16T23:20:49.372-07:002015-04-16T23:20:49.372-07:00So here are my thoughts on the debris not matching...So here are my thoughts on the debris not matching a Mogul neoprene array launched early June.<br /><br />1) It's pretty clear that Charles Moore didn't keep great records to begin with / even Ufologists agree on that.<br /><br />2) He was a early 20's grad student - if you have ever worked with grad students you may recall that not everyone documents properly - many make mistakes or don't recall accurately what they did. Furthermore not everyone is a great student either meaning I would not consider Moore an impeccable scientist extrodinare at that time of his life.<br /><br />3) Sure - he has changed his story and reasoning on things, but only in response to changing details brought forth by Ufologists. The gouge for example is one place he states that his balloons couldn't have done that - well the gouge has never been proven and even Marcel and Brazil never said there was one, so Moore's response has to be taken in the context of bad information given to him.<br /><br />4) Ufologists claim that he and the NYU team had "great UFO sightings" only to be ignored by the military - probably true - and that he was miffed as a result. But then they claim he deliberately fudged his date to support the direction of Flight 4, to help the military in their coverup - sounds contradictory to me. Can't have it both ways.<br /><br />5) His data was forced by him to fit landing area near Roswell - maybe, but maybe he is t that great with math anyway or didn't care to do it properly for other reasons.<br /><br />6) To verify neoprene vs polyethylene flights, has anyone ever interviewed anyone else on the NYU team to verify Moore's notes on types?<br /><br />7) His log book is a record of attempted official flights - there isn't anything ruling out that they didn't launch some unofficial polyethelne balloons without the white box but with battery box attached as pre-flight trial runs with the new material.<br /><br />8) Bear in mind these are college students, not Q clearance military personnel.<br /><br />9) What are the chances that a July 1-2 polyethelne unofficial test simy got caught up in the thunderstorm and was forced down 12 hours after launch? In such a case they may not have recorded it or cared to go look for it because it wasn't an official flight with full equipment? Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-11474549152593218432015-04-16T22:22:42.741-07:002015-04-16T22:22:42.741-07:00Larry Halcombe - regarding witness debris descript...Larry Halcombe - regarding witness debris descriptions.<br /><br />Of all places, David Rudiak's website is a place where you can obtain each witness's description of the debris material. These aren't my words they are theirs - sticks, foil, rubber, tape etc. See for yourself.<br /><br />http://roswellproof.homestead.com/debris_main.htmlBrian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-23140993208009932962015-04-16T19:37:28.961-07:002015-04-16T19:37:28.961-07:00Although against my better judgement I'll slip...Although against my better judgement I'll slip in here with a couple of comments.<br /><br />Maj. Jesse Marcel from a very young age was intrigued by radio and radio's. He built a primitive radio at a very young age. He went on to become a amateur radio operator (HAM) requiring an FCC license and a solid background in radio equipment. He was also schooled at Langley AFB on radar and rawin radar reflectors.<br /><br />The point here is that he stated what he found on the Foster ranch was like nothing he had ever seen. At that time Project Mogul used a daisy chain of neoprene weather balloons, something Marcel would have known (although they would have deteriorated quickly on the desert floor) radio equipment with Vacuum tubes in a circuit boards, balsa wood and aluminum foil. It's beyond the pale to think that Mogul debris was nothing like Marcel had ever seen before.<br /><br />Now one poster mentions "tough balsa wood," don't know that I've ever heard of tough balsa wood, especially balsa wood wood that can't be cut, burned or bent! <br /><br />As Kevin says General Mills did use polyethylene balloons, sure but as he noted, the time line doesn't fit. <br /><br />Another tidbit, in 1949, when the Navy was using polyethylene balloons for Project Mogul, Dr. Charles Moore, head of the project, while tracking a balloon flight saw a UFO in the theodolite he was using to track the balloon flight. Moore wrote a report to the Air Force and became incensed when he found out they tried to debunk his report. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12035379587054006528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-76261152881422096562015-04-16T18:24:12.031-07:002015-04-16T18:24:12.031-07:00David,
I'm unaware that Haut ever said that. ...David,<br /><br /><i>I'm unaware that Haut ever said that. Maybe provide a quote or reference?</i><br /><br />Here is the source for this. It is all in the first paragraph.<br /><br />http://www.roswellfiles.com/Witnesses/hautstory.htm<br /><br />In a July, 1990 video-taped interview with Haut conducted by Fred Whiting for the Fund for UFO Research, Whiting asked Haut if he could remember Col. Blanchard ever mentioning the "flying saucer" matter after the official weather balloon line was established. Haut replied that he did, at a staff meeting a week or two later. He recalled Blanchard opening the meeting with a comment something like this: "Well, we sure shot ourselves in the foot with that balloon fiasco. It was just something from a project at Alamogordo, and some of the guys were here on our base later, too. Anyway, it's done and over with."John's Spacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08241028519082710381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-83916464956838368682015-04-16T15:02:53.090-07:002015-04-16T15:02:53.090-07:00Brian -
July 2, 1947... 20 - 350 gram meteorologi...Brian -<br /><br />July 2, 1947... 20 - 350 gram meteorological balloons.<br /><br />July 3, 1947... 10 General Mills 7' polyethylene...<br /><br />Flight No. 10... "This flight was the first to use a large plastic balloon as the lifting vehicle."<br /><br />Flight No. 4 (June 4, 1947) had it been launched, would have used neoprene... the cluster of balloons was neoprene...<br /><br />All the documentation suggests that no polyethylene was used prior to July 1947 and therefore was not responsible for the debris recovered.<br /><br />Information from the official Air Force report and the records of the Mogul team in New Mexico.<br /><br />The display in Ramey's office is of a neoprene balloon and the torn up remains of a rawin radar reflector.<br /><br />KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-3191647168471164112015-04-16T13:08:15.575-07:002015-04-16T13:08:15.575-07:00Kevin - I assume that's from the official Mogu...Kevin - I assume that's from the official Mogul documents, right?Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-2462576105606181432015-04-16T12:57:06.017-07:002015-04-16T12:57:06.017-07:00Brian -
None of the balloons in the June 4 array ...Brian -<br /><br />None of the balloons in the June 4 array contained those materials... they were neoprene... the other materials were used after July 1.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-20191037585114507532015-04-16T11:16:47.362-07:002015-04-16T11:16:47.362-07:00Paul - As the military has pointed out, as well as...Paul - As the military has pointed out, as well as the plastics industry, polyethelne was not in wide use or even sold as a commercial product until 1949. Mogul was the first use of this plastic in high altitude balloons. In addition, Tyrelene, which was also discovered a few years earlier (known today as Dacron), was polyethelne extruded as a thin clear "angel like" fiber or "hairs"...it had not been employed in any commercial or military products until then. Tyrelene is used in the manufacture of ropes, ties, cord or string, etc.<br /><br />None of these guys would have known about these products since they were not being used prior in commercial or military use. Today they are common as dirt, but back then they were not. <br /><br />As stated previously, but ignored by others, is a previous post were one witness involved in the clean-up of the debris field was asked to select which material he thought was best representative of what he collected - he picked silver acetate (plastic) and Marcel Jr. did the same test and chose the same material but said it was "lighter". <br /><br />Of course it was, because a thicker version of polyethelne did not come out for about two years later.<br /><br />The original testimony that Brazel, his friends, and Marcel Sr gave to the media prior to the printed retraction desribes the material as silver like foil, tough balsa wood type sticks, a type of rubber, parchment paper with latin numbers and symbols, tough bakelite, a black metal box, and some kind of string. <br /><br />These can hardly be the stuff of an intergallactic or interplanetary vehicle. <br /><br />With all the hype about saucer sitings and a group of military men who to their credit, wanted to figure out if these things had any threat potential to the US (and presumably thinking they could be Soviet), no doubt thought they had found material that might have come from a saucer, because to them this material was unfamiliar and very strange. Plus they did not know at the time of discovery about any balloon operations in NM.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-75229083309393108682015-04-16T11:10:45.876-07:002015-04-16T11:10:45.876-07:00John's Space wrote:
... I think it is also not...John's Space wrote:<br /><i>... I think it is also notable that Blanchard came close to stating the Air Force’s mid-1990s story in a staff meeting shortly after the 1947 incident. It doesn’t mention a weather balloon like the official story but rather a project from Alamogordo.</i><br /><br />The Pentagon's AFOSI office, which investigated Roswell in 1994, was well aware of the Project Mogul explanation because Robert Todd, had been pushing it since 1991. They referenced Todd and his work in their Roswell report. They also referenced Karl Pflock, who in 1994 was likewise proposing Project Mogul in his "Roswell in Perspective."<br /><br />If you go back to the Moore/Berlitz 1980 "Roswell Incident", you will also see that they bring up the Mogul balloon launches (only they didn't know the project name), since they interviewed Mogul engineer Charles Moore, who discounted it originally as an explanation. You will also see one of the Mogul balloon schematics in the book, probably provided them by Moore.<br /><br />And on July 9, 1947, a saucer debunking demonstration was held at Alamogordo. The press was told that they ran a project using balloons with radar targets training people there in radar tracking. That story was also carried in the Roswell Daily Record. The press was also told that these training balloon flights probably explained the balloon allegedly found near Corona on a ranch (obviously referring to Brazel's ranch and the widely carried story of Gen. Ramey debunking what was found as a weather balloon and radar target).<br /><br />AFOSI in 1994 was also well aware of this balloon demo at Alamogordo supposedly explaining Roswell as one of the balloon launches from there, since they specifically referenced it and reprinted the article from the Alamogordo News.<br /><br />The point is, it is not some amazing coincidence that AFOSI in 1994 picked up on Project Mogul and ran with it as the new, improved balloon explanation for Roswell. That explanation dated back to 1947. They simply revived it and made it official.<br /><br /><i>But, you have demonstrated that the military seems to have over reacted in putting down a story if it was just a misidentified balloon. The Haut recollection does have one other little nugget and that is the statement that people from Alamogordo were on site at Roswell in connection with the incident.</i> <br /><br />I'm unaware that Haut ever said that. Maybe provide a quote or reference?<br /><br />The last Mogul balloon launch for the summer had been July 7. The team immediately packed up and flew out. At best, maybe a tiny skeleton crew was left behind who had assisted, but not the main Mogul team. They could NOT have been at Roswell when everything blew up July 8.<br /><br /><i>That tends to support either the ET theory or the Mogul theory but not a conventional weather balloon.</i><br /><br />All Ramey showed and claimed what was recovered was a singular weather balloon and radar target, just like used all over the country by multiple weather stations, not a multi-balloon, multi target Mogul. There was also no Mogul equipment, in fact Ramey disclaiming any equipment being found.<br /><br />And finally, a few hours later when Brazel was interviewed at the RDR, he denied finding any sort of balloon rigging, when a real Mogul would have left hundreds of yards of rigging behind. He only surmised that a balloon held up his foil and sticks box kite, because all he found were small rubber strips, not an intact balloon that Ramey displayed. Besides, he said, he knew what a weather balloon looked like, because he had previously found two on the ranch, but this didn't resemble those in any way.<br /><br />If you compare Ramey's balloon display to Brazel's description of what he allegedly found, to what a true Mogul should have left behind, there are multiple, irreconcilable discrepancies in quantity, condition, and descriptions of debris, plus no unaccounted for Moguls that could have gotten there.David Rudiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213284910238852377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-75407336943658620432015-04-16T02:45:05.017-07:002015-04-16T02:45:05.017-07:00@ John...
Concerning the comments here on later o...@ John...<br /><br />Concerning the comments here on later occasions that Blanchard spoke about the incident.<br /><br />The story that he was at some kind of reunion and was asked about what it was he saw and he answered along the lines of "It was the damnednest thing I ever saw", always pricked my attention.<br /><br />It implies that he was STILL left completely in the dark over even the most basic information on Project Mogul years after the event.<br /><br />I'm fully aware of the military concept of "need to know"...but I would have thought that someone in Blanchards position...someone who had made a complete mug of himself by sending out the news wire...and was then expected to make a humiliating u-turn,and back up the "cover story"...did, at this stage, have a "need to know" about Mogul. Even if only a layman's knowledge of it. <br />Yet when William Brainerd asked him, it appears he was still completely baffled. <br />I can understand why Blanchard wouldn't have a "need to know" about flying saucers, but surely, under the circumstances, he might have been given the heads up on Mogul....if only to keep him onside with the weather balloon cover-story. Paul Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04267452625547760508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-22845804613667561582015-04-16T01:43:41.967-07:002015-04-16T01:43:41.967-07:00Brian...
"It wasn't a weather balloon - ...Brian...<br /><br />"It wasn't a weather balloon - it was the equivalent of what we would call today a DoD COMSAT - not a simple weather balloon. Call it what the USAF claims it was - Project Mogul."<br /><br />From what I can gather, the only significant difference between mogul and a weather balloon, besides its size and array, was the microphone fitted, and the small radio transmitter that relayed what the microphone was picking up. I know the principle material was polyethylene as opposed to rubber but <br />I'll never understand why something like this could have so badly confused the intelligence officer of a military base that was used seeing cutting edge stuff.Paul Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04267452625547760508noreply@blogger.com