Thursday, December 08, 2022

The Ramey Memo, the Latest on AARO and MADAR

John Greenewald announced that his latest FOIA requests have yielded some results. He said that what he learned has contradicted some of the recent rumors about what is happening inside the government investigation. He said that there has been some recent active AARO activity, AARO being the latest acronym being thrown around. This activity might explain why the required report from the Office of the Director, National Intelligence and the DoD has been delayed. You can learn about this here:

For those interested in the Ramey Memo, it seems we have reached the end of the road. The Ramey Memo is a document held by General Roger Ramey as he crouched near the remains of a weather balloon and radar target in his office delivered from Roswell on July 8, 1947. Blow ups of the document do allow some of the words such as weather balloon and Fort Worth, Texas, to be read, while the majority of the document is obscured based on the way Ramey holds it, the camera angle and the lighting.

For the last thirty years dozens have attempted to read the document using progressively better scans from the original negative. At this point, there is nothing new to be learned from the memo. In fact, one of those who examined the negative at length just reported:

Seriously doubt that much more will ever be made from further examination of the negatives. It was quite apparent to me at first glance with the high-power digital reader that we were seeing the maximum resolution attainable of the film grain. The breakdown of lenes resolution and the degree of film grain clumping confounds additional clarity of read. Were the grain structure not subject to the vagaries of processing there might have been more. It was obvious on examination of the negs that they had been over processed (typical of news photographers who wish to make sure they have some sort of image) and then printed wet (which accounts for the dirt and dust) [J. Bond Johnson said that he took the wet prints into the news room] then force dried (which aids in clumping.). All things considered, especially the small area of interest, it’s no small wonder that the message displays as much as it does.

In the last attempt to provide a high quality scan from the original negative, the situation was not altered. In an article published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration, the ultimate conclusions were:

Although the process is ongoing, and new technology was applied [in the most recent attempt] to clarify the text, the results were disappointing. The image seemed slightly clearer, but the difference was insufficient to make any definitive statement about the memo’s contents, including whether it was of military or civilian nature, or if it referenced an ETH-related event in New Mexico. The memo itself is not readable with any reasonable degree of certainty, so we are left with various interpretations of the memo that the possibility suggests something extraordinary but without the proof that it was… [I]t must be noted that those who conducted the latest scans think that physically scanning the negative – regardless of the quality of the equipment and the innovations in the technology – still will not settle the issue. The next step is thus more likely to be the use of artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML) methods to discriminate between the remaining noise that conceals the lettering and the actual letters, assuming that sufficient data for this approach can be obtained… Without technological breakthroughs, there is low probability that the Ramey Memo will reveal anything further, much less conclusive information.

The technology does not exist to clarify the memo, and according to the experts, given the nature of film, it may never exist. I have written about this several times and will note here that the book, Understanding Roswell, has an in-depth analysis, as well as a history of the Ramey Memo. For additional information see:

Inside the Special Collections Vault at University of Texas, Arlington
where the Ramey Memo negative is house. 
Photo copyright by Kevin Randle

Fran Ridge reports that there was another correlation on the MADAR network. On July 10, of this year, the witness was near Queen Creek, Arizona, when he spotted a spherical shaped UFO. He was in a darkened area so that the bright, green object caught his attention. He said the it was a vibrant, emerald green with a yellow aura around it. He said it was moving very fast.

He also said that it dropped rapidly, levelled out, and then accelerated horizontally. He thought it was about 500 feet in the air and was in sight for only about ten seconds. He said that he didn’t have enough time to get to his cell phone to photograph the UFO.

Fran reported, “The field data is not compelling but zeros out at the specific moment given by the witness. The accelerometer reading has a very slight peak at that time. Neither is that interesting as compared to other "data" cases. But two minutes prior to the event the onboard compass showed a variation of more than 3 degrees.”

Fran concluded, “The sighting was documented as filed on July 10th at 12:50:16 AM. The duration was a brief 10-seconds. The compass variation alone gets this incident at least into the compass-case category of over 150 incidents. Due to the brevity of the incident the value of this case is somewhat limited. The witness left no contact information and therefore no formal investigation to clarify some issues was possible. Therefore, the case was closed as insufficient data.” 

1 comment:

F. said...

Real interesting story from the Black Vault a couple of days ago. Apparently Strategic Command has a JIATF on the subject as there's a J-2 report produced by them that mentions it.

The way the related paragraphs were classified is very interesting as well, its in the TK and SI control systems with a NOFORN handling caveat, TK (TALENT-KEYHOLE) is for anything collected using a space based platform, SI is a control system that replaced COMINT, which replaced UMBRA and SPOKE, and generally only gets used for intercepts, whether voice or non-voice. I'm half surprised it didn't get thrown into VRK, the system that replaced ECI, had I been classification authority I probably would have done that myself, not going to lie.

I'm really curious as to what's in the redacted sections that would warrant those two control systems and the NOFORN caveat, and why STRATCOM would care at all. Unless we caught the Russians complaining about UAPs buzzing their ICBM silos, Baikonur, Plesetsk, Kasputin Yar, Sarov, and/or Murmansk over an open channel or on a net that wasn't exactly secure or the GRU is being what's become characteristically sloppy and a resident decided to talk about it on the phone from somewhere we're intercepting to the center or between two residencies that we're probably also intercepting.