 |
| Jesse Marcel, Sr. |
As you all know, one of the
problems with the Roswell case is that we have been unable to find any letters,
diaries, journals, or notes that were written in 1947 that would tell us about
the crash. There have been hints about this, but to this point, none of those
hints produced anything that is conclusive. Inez Wilcox, wife of the Roswell
sheriff, had written a story about her “four years in the county jail,” talking
about what it was like to be the wife of the sheriff. Although the original article
contained nothing about the crash, she added a page later that talked about
that. Unfortunately, the document was undated, so didn’t help us at all. She
could have written her story sometime after 1978 when Jesse Marcel, Sr. told Stan
Friedman and Len Stringfield about picking up pieces of a flying saucer in New
Mexico.
 |
| Jesse Marcel, Sr. Photo copyright by Kevin Randle. |
Now I learn, through emails sent to
me by several colleagues, that we might have some of those documents. Christina
Stock reported in the Roswell Daily
Record, that Marcel Sr. might just have left that sort of documentation.
Jesse Marcel III, the grandson of Jesse Sr. and son of Jesse Sr., announced
that they had found a “treasure trove” of documents relating to his grandfather’s
military service, including a journal kept by the senior Marcel. If such a
journal contains references to what he saw on the Brazel ranch that day in July
1947, and if it contains descriptions of the find, and if it makes any
reference to alien beings, that would be huge. Here would be a document that
contains information written in 1947 while still fresh in the mind and that
would not be contaminated by everything that followed when the Roswell case
exploded into the mainstream in the late 1970s.
As I say, this could be the sort of
documentation that we all have been waiting for. True, it’s not something
official from the US government, but it would be something written in the
proper time frame and that would make it a very important document. The lack of
any thing like that, written at the time in the form of letters, diaries or
journals, has always been a worry for all of us. If this pans out, it might be
the key to unlocking the mystery.
219 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 219 of 21909rja wrote:
"Like I've said before: you guys just can't place anything in the proper context."
There is nothing in the same context as ET visitation - that's what you still don't get...
Have completed the "building survey" and only one person thought the Atomic bomb was even close to the discovery of aliens visiting earth...
No doubt these words will be twisted to suit another theory or one could back down and admit they were mistaken...
I'm picking the former...
Regards
Nitram
BB fired:
"And because you seem to be the queen of history regarding aluminum foil production and its use in the common kitchen, I might add some of your notions are incorrect.
Wax Paper (Butcher paper) was commercialized to households in 1927 until replaced in the US by Reynolds Wrap (aluminum foil) in 1947. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to track this history and aluminum foil was not prevalent in grocery stores or kitchens until 1947. That's a fact.
What you are referring to is the invention of "tin foil" which used actual tin and was invented in Europe in the late 19th Century. Sure, a guy in Switzerland invented "tin foil" in 1910, and some attempted to produce it in the US in 1913, but it never saw wide spread use until 1947.
The scrap drives you're referring to during WWII were for ALL METALS not just aluminum. Pots, pans, etc. Sure some new candy wrappers did employ aluminum foil, but it was backed by paper. Basically a silver paper -- not aluminum foil as known after 1947."
David Rudiak - currently traveling sent me an email, which he has kindly allowed me to use:
"If Bell had done even a cursory web search about the history of aluminum foil (such as checking Wikipedia article), he would have known that it was an extremely common consumer product from 1913 onward, used in wrapping gum, candies, tobacco products, etc., etc. It was the most widely used metal foil before WWII. (The common troops, of course, knew all about it from their cigarettes, chewing gum, chocolate bars, etc.) Household aluminum foil was actually first introduced in the late 1920s (not 1947), but didn't take hold (I suspect because of price and onset of Great Depression).
Attached is a short chronology of aluminum foil history (See next post) that I compiled some time ago after other debunking idiots made the same argument as Bell that nobody at Roswell knew of aluminum foil because Reynold's wrap didn't come out until 1947.
I am more frustrated than amused by people like Bell who can't even be bothered to do the simplest of fact-checking."
BB - remember the good advise that I gave CDA - you need to "ask more questions".
Rather than make silly statements which ET believers, like David, simply tear to pieces...
Regards
Nitram
Roswell authority David Rudiak compiled:
"Aluminum foil (AF) history, pre-Roswell and 1947:
Before Roswell in 1947, Aluminum foil was a COMMONLY used in consumer products for over 3 decades, starting in the 19-teens to wrap candy, gum and tobacco products when Alcoa Aluminum in the U.S. began mass production of aluminum foil in 1913. Wrigley’s chewing gum immediately adopted it to wrap their gum products and Lifesavers. Laminated foil-paper or foil-carboard was introduced in the 1920s and 1930s. Foil-paper as insulation introduced around 1935. Before WWII, over half of metal foil in the U.S. was aluminum foil. Almost all aluminum production during WWII was diverted to military use, and aluminum foil was in widespread use by troops to wrap food products such as candies and chewing gum (almost all of which went to the military).
1886: The Hall-Heroult process enables the first industrial, large-scale production method of aluminum by electrolysis.
1903: Wright Brothers airplane engine made of Al1888: Start of Alcoa (Aluminum Corporation of America), founded by Hall: first consumer products included Al cookware
1903: First AF made in France
1910: First mass production AF in Switzerland
1911: Swiss Tobler wraps its chocolate in AF
1912: Swiss Maggi packs soups and stock ((boullion) in AF
1913: Alcoa starts mass production AF in U.S.
1913: Wrigley’s replaces tinfoil with AF to wrap gum.
1913-1920: AF quickly adopted in consumer products to wrap cigars, cigarettes, tea, candies (e.g., Life Savers, Hershey’s Kisses and chocolate bars), chewing gum, and in other packaging. 90% of aluminum production devoted to military during WWI: used to make canteens, mess kits, and helmets.
1919: Reynolds Metals Company (AKA Reynold’s Aluminum Co.) was founded in 1919 as the U.S. Foil Company
1921: First AF laminated paperboard folding carton produced
1922: Eskimo Pie desert wrapped in AF—largest client of new Reynold’s aluminum (already used to wrap Reynold’s tobacco products)
1920s: AF adopted by dairy industry in Europe to wrap cheeses
Late 1920s: First household AF marketed in U.S. (failed to catch on, perhaps because of cost during Great Depression compared to wax paper for household use)
1929: AF accounts for 11% of all metal foil in U.S.
1931: AF rolls and sheets widely used as institutional wrap by hotel, restaurant, and hospital kitchens.
1932: AF accounts for 50% of all metal foil in U.S.
~1935: AF-laminated building insulation paper introduced by Reynold’s; also aluminum bottle labels and heat-sealed foil bags for foods
1937: First mass use of AF as labels on liquor bottles in U.S.
1938: AF accounts for 56% of all foil in U.S.
1942-1945: Most commercial/consumer Al production diverted to war effort. Principal wartime AF uses: packaging to prevent damage by moisture, vermin, and heat; electrical capacitors; insulation; anti-radar chaff (made of same foil-paper laminate used in radar targets).
1945: Eight AF plants in U.S.
1945: Aluminum siding introduced (Reynold’s)
1947: Reynold’s Aluminum re-introduces AF as a household product."
But Anonymous...! If USA had any "nose out of joint" issues if they were guzumped to disclosure, then at a stroke, they could open files and say "actually, we were first"
But, (like the Icelandic govt are happy to allow some Italian chap to claim he discovered the "New World")...I expect the American's would not be remotely bothered.
The world's population wouldn't be bothered who announced it either...much more pressing questions would be asked.
""Have completed the "building survey" and only one person thought the Atomic bomb was even close to the discovery of aliens visiting earth..."~Nitram Ang
The survey where you had preliminary results in less than 9 minutes? Sounds scientific.
But it still leaves your "logic" in a bad place: if the Manhattan Project could not be successfully concealed (with all it's security)....how exactly could something even more significant elude not only the media but foreign Intel for 70 years? It couldn't.
""But Anonymous...! If USA had any "nose out of joint" issues if they were guzumped to disclosure, then at a stroke, they could open files and say "actually, we were first"~Paul Young
And then face the bad PR for the fact they concealed it?
"But, (like the Icelandic govt are happy to allow some Italian chap to claim he discovered the "New World")...I expect the American's would not be remotely bothered.
The world's population wouldn't be bothered who announced it either...much more pressing questions would be asked."~Paul Young
If you think this could have been successfully concealed from (for example) the USSR (as you guys keep claiming) then you've got a real problem. Again (to put this in the context of the time): the highest levels of US Intel and the government were all bracing themselves for the possibility of a Soviet attack on Western Europe during this time. Now if you were in their shoes, and you are certain it could be concealed.....aren't you forced to reveal this? Basically to send them a message that such a attack would face this new technology? I would think so.
So this logic of it could have been concealed traps you based on the situation.
Fellows: Kevin was an Army Aviator, to survive a tour of duty in combat, one had to have an exceptional level of intelligence, and some luck, but I am sure that most of the lesser intelligence Aviators, had a harder time surviving in combat, most unfortunate for their crew mates...The level of IQ required to even enter flight training was very high, and the interaction with instructors and peers would soon weed out those who were not up to the tasks. Kevin is very sharp and not just another basement commando who writes about this subject, so keep that in mind when demanding IQ levels from such a person..I am surprised (Not really) by some of the comments here, show some respect and unless one is also a combat aviator, keep the pesonal attacks to a minimum...
Anonymous...
Like my previous analogy of you...it's completely accurate.
"...it's completely accurate."~Paul Young
It's anything but. But have no fear: I'm here to educate UFO buffs...at no cost. :)
All -
This conversation has drifted to the point that it has nothing to do with the original post. I think I'll end it here... unless the comment deals with the subject. Fair warning, though I really don't have to do that.
It's an accurate comparison.
Same as future historians wouldn't be remotely interested in which government decided to disclose that the ETH was actually a fact. "Who was first" to disclose would not matter around 24 hours after the event. It would pale into comparison with the really big questions...
eg WHO ARE THEY? WHAT DO THEY WANT? IF IT COMES TO IT,CAN WE DEFEND OURSELVES?
Who disclosed first? Who cares!...that doesn't matter any more.
""Who was first" to disclose would not matter around 24 hours after the event."~Paul Young
Sure. That's why the US government poured all that money into the Apollo program. So they could lose the race to the moon. lol
Being first may be important if national prestige is at stake. But ET would involve much more; it would transcend such concerns and make them seem petty. What's at stake isn't just some added prestige, but potentially, the survival of present society, conceivably, even humanity.
The "race to the moon" was a massive technical achievement. Something to take great pride in.
By contrast If by complete happenstance a flying saucer crashes on your country...how can that be considered an "achievement" ?....Something to scream from the rooftops "it crashed on us first!".
By contrast If by complete happenstance a flying saucer crashes on your country...how can that be considered an "achievement" ?~Paul Young
Probably the promise of what is to come: after all, we are talking quite a lot of game changing developments from such a event. And (of course) you have the same issue I spoke of where if you believe this could be concealed from the Soviets (as you do)....it becomes difficult to warn them off of any aggressive plans with something they don't know about.
But you're comparing a great achievement (first to make a successful landing on the moon)...with a geographical fluke (first ET spaceship to crash on a random plot of a land.)
Well no, I explained what I was comparing. And also why (by your very own logic) it would never be concealed.
But you were trying to claim that USA would really REALLY want to claim first proof the ETH was correct by comparing their achievement of putting the first man on the moon.
Anonymous "Sure. That's why the US government poured all that money into the Apollo program. So they could lose the race to the moon. lol"
Happenstance isn't achievement.
"But you were trying to claim that USA would really REALLY want to claim first proof the ETH was correct by comparing their achievement of putting the first man on the moon.
..............
Happenstance isn't achievement.~Paul Young
Well first off, that isn't the only reason I gave as to why they would reveal it.....and secondly: I didn't say they would announce as a "achievement"....I said that they would do it for a variety of reasons including the prestige it would bring. To put it in another way, which scenario would you think they would have preferred: us being the first to announce this.....or the USSR?
I would think the answer to that would be obvious. As a guide we can look to President Clinton's announcement on the ALH84001 meteorite. (Not exactly the biggest "achievement" in the world....but got a President crowing about it.)
As to the logic of happenstance equaling achievement......who told you that international politics was logical?
Post a Comment