tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post4409635610625632051..comments2024-03-19T11:13:40.642-07:00Comments on A Different Perspective: Lee Reeves and the Roswell UFO CrashKRandlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comBlogger120125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-64180909714840747632015-07-22T13:20:33.961-07:002015-07-22T13:20:33.961-07:00@ Neal
I didn't think you were dodging the q...@ Neal <br /><br />I didn't think you were dodging the question. Just saying that given other witnesses, as you stated, have often claimed photos were made but were taken away, seems odd that no witness to my knowledge even ventured a word or two about it during all the claims made in the Roswell investigation interviews.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-16940949952999067552015-07-22T08:15:14.079-07:002015-07-22T08:15:14.079-07:00@Brian,
I'm not dodging the question but I hav...@Brian,<br />I'm not dodging the question but I have no way of knowing the answer. Kevin would be the better person to ask. Of all the people the researchers interviewed were any of those from the base photo unit? I think it's a good question.<br /><br />There are quite a few accounts of photos being taken and then disappearing from other places. Allegedly gun camera films were made, Gordon Cooper said a film was made while he was present.<br />We haven't seen any of those films.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703256896826354786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-7770674063769508982015-07-21T17:31:01.966-07:002015-07-21T17:31:01.966-07:00@ Neal
Possibly off topic...but regarding Roswel...@ Neal <br /><br />Possibly off topic...but regarding Roswell, the lack of substantial photography and no mention of it being taken is suspicious.<br /><br />Were photos shot and simply destroyed in the Roswell records purge, or was there nothing to photograph to begin with?Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-37375411913306094652015-07-21T14:57:11.653-07:002015-07-21T14:57:11.653-07:00@ Brian,
I agree some of those pictures show real ...@ Brian,<br />I agree some of those pictures show real objects in the sky. It was more difficult to fake with film and fewer people could make a good fake. I do think they should be closely examined before calling them fakes. The same thing goes for the vids you mentioned earlier. It's possible they're real but faking does exist so they shouldn't be taken at face value.<br /><br />Not to be contrary and maybe I shouldn't admit it but I would have to read the manual to use my camera in video mode. But either way, video or still, the reaction would be exactly what I would expect. And this would also be strike two for some because it would make me one of those dang repeaters.<br /><br />I fear we're getting off topic here.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703256896826354786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-9701651258239287062015-07-21T14:15:14.799-07:002015-07-21T14:15:14.799-07:00@ Neal
If you followed that train of thought you...@ Neal <br /><br />If you followed that train of thought you could argue every photo taken from the 1800's till today was "faked" by someone. Of course they weren't. Some of what's out there is real, certainly not a high percentage but some is legitimate as are older photos taken in the '50s or '60's.<br /><br />If by chance you caught an object on your handheld today, a 2 min clip that showed a silver disc floating, zigzagging, and making right angle turns at unbelievable speeds, then showed us the film clip....how would you respond if we said ... "Right Neal...you are paid to make pictures lie...your film is fake...."?Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-33782320957393919172015-07-21T12:46:11.363-07:002015-07-21T12:46:11.363-07:00@Brian
I can accept ET as possible explanation as...@Brian<br /><br />I can accept ET as possible explanation as well as dimensional, time travel, man made, spiritual, and maybe even something I've never heard of yet. Anti-skeptic? Anti closed minded is more like it.<br /><br />Yeah sure, at NASA Bob Lazar and I used to hang out with a bunch of aliens. Did you know that they don't need a camera to take pictures? They do it with their minds. Amazing award winning stuff too. Actually, I don't remember the subject coming up.<br /><br />Clearly authentic vids? Really? You say, but I'm too familiar with CGI to fall for any vids. If I could find some high resolution photos in raw format that I could download and examine then I might start to believe. Remember, I'm an advertising photographer I get paid to make pictures lie.<br /><br />I'm sorry if I didn't buy your explanation for the Arnold sightings. It just didn't sound logical to me. I do believe that man made objects can explain some sightings just not all sightings.<br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703256896826354786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-53358385442017909662015-07-21T11:21:46.773-07:002015-07-21T11:21:46.773-07:00@ Neal - you said:
"You do love to twist wor...@ Neal - you said:<br /><br />"You do love to twist words and make up stuff."<br /><br />Ah.....What was I twisting or making up?<br /><br />On your claimed "agnostic" position - my take on your posts is that you are ET favorable...and....anti-skeptic. Which is fine, but you do seem to refute ANY alternate theories always taking a slant favorable towards ET. I don't see you as agnostic at all. Just my take. Did your stay at NASA influence you towards ET? Why?<br /><br />On classified projects - no, I wasn't referring to already declassified projects like the now very old SR-71 etc. I wrote that you should look up the "ARV" not the TR3-B or even the related TELOS.<br /><br />Besides, haven't you seen the clearly authentic vids with the "TR3-B"? Those triangles are not alien made. They're made by us and they are used for surveillance monitoring. There aren't many original clips or photos, but the few that are there, are of US classified projects.<br /><br />It continues to amaze me that people believe humans can't develop advanced aerial tech when the very same people are buying and trading up their advanced handheld devises every 18 months or so because processing capacity has tripled in that time.<br /><br />Do you think everything that is currently unexplained should be attributed to the hypothesis that it all comes from people from "outer space?"<br /><br />Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-416339850442322132015-07-21T10:45:37.546-07:002015-07-21T10:45:37.546-07:00"Unlike deniers I don't feel it's imp..."Unlike deniers I don't feel it's imperative to be able to explain everything."<br /><br />I suppose you mean skeptics when you say this. And here it is you twisting things.<br />Skeptics just say that the evidence for the things claimed in relation to UFO's and particularly Roswell is not compelling.<br />We don't have to explain everything. The paranormal believer has to.<br /><br />Lance<br /><br />Lancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17280922104955532058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-85551711511529465702015-07-21T10:30:51.873-07:002015-07-21T10:30:51.873-07:00@Bian
You do love to twist words and make up stuf...@Bian<br /><br />You do love to twist words and make up stuff. First of all, where did I say anything about aliens? I'm ET agnostic, literally I don't know. Unlike deniers I don't feel it's imperative to be able to explain everything.<br /><br />I can't answer the question because I don't find an answer in any testimony. In other words, apparently it wasn't asked when they were alive. Simple as that.<br /><br />I wasn't talking about declassified projects, there are plenty of pictures of U2s and SR-71s. You can probably find pictures of those craft under construction.<br /><br />How many pictures of your TR-3B have you seen? And I mean production pictures like I used to take of the shuttle tank. It doesn't matter what the real name is either so don't use the dodge that you used before.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703256896826354786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-40967918746121354862015-07-21T10:06:07.158-07:002015-07-21T10:06:07.158-07:00@ Neal - you said:
"The answer to your last ...@ Neal - you said:<br /><br />"The answer to your last post is I don't know, you would have to ask the Marcels and they're all dead."<br /><br />Yes...and that's the usual response....."aliens crashed....it's a fact....no I can't answer your questions...don't ask...and all my sources are dead...but yes my alien theory is right and you're wrong".<br /><br />It's easy to dismiss skeptical challenges to your reasoning with the excuse "my witness are dead". Why not evaluate what they did say or do rather than dismiss it?<br /><br />Also - there is evidence of classified projects including photos - do some homework on McCandlish's ARV and the USAF photo of it over Utah that he discovered a decade later.<br /><br />Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-44191581589496135202015-07-21T09:18:05.160-07:002015-07-21T09:18:05.160-07:00Neal & Brian:
That is exactly the point. Rosw...Neal & Brian:<br /><br />That is exactly the point. Roswell was NOT secret. If it had been, Marcel would never have brought the stuff home and spread it out on the carpet! This proves that the ranch debris never was secret. The only way out of this dilemma is to assume Marcel was extremely, and criminally, neglectful. In which case he ought to have faced demotion and/or severe discipline, or worse.<br /><br />But again and again we read in books & articles how hush-hush this Roswell operation was and how everything was top secret, and still is. <br /><br />I brought up this point long ago. I believe Randle & Schmitt's response was to say the debris was indeed top secret but was only classified as such AFTER it arrived at the base! Before then, it was free for anyone to see, touch and photograph. So we are led to believe. <br /><br />The same kind of argument applies to those Ft Worth photos. The real stuff is not visible, only substituted junk. <br /><br />Perhaps Marcel was so clever that he only put substituted junk on his home carpet whilst leaving the real stuff in his truck. Perhaps.cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-68038852508794718792015-07-21T08:48:30.943-07:002015-07-21T08:48:30.943-07:00@Brian,
The answer to your last post is I don'...@Brian,<br />The answer to your last post is I don't know, you would have to ask the Marcels and they're all dead. If you really want to know you could ask the current owners of the property for permission to dig. For the right price they might let you do that.<br /><br />After the war soldiers, including officers, did bring contraband home. My Uncle was a Marine Corps officer in the Pacific, he brought some contraband home too. You're comparing apples to oranges though, nearly everyone was doing it and you can only imagine the logistical nightmare of searching hundreds of thousands of duffle bags.In Roswell we don't know how many soldiers were involved but far less than hundreds of thousands can be safely assumed. Not to mention war trophies weren't secret and Roswell was.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703256896826354786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-11035162925874503272015-07-21T08:20:01.310-07:002015-07-21T08:20:01.310-07:00@ Neal - Marcel Jr
Don't forget though, Marce...@ Neal - Marcel Jr<br /><br />Don't forget though, Marcel Jr is on record, more than once, for saying that small pieces of the foil were left on the kitchen floor and that his mother swept them outside the next day. He stated on video multiple times that today there is a concrete patio over that location. So if this stuff was so secret, why does he recall his mother sweeping bits and pieces outside the door without even a single bit of apprehension? Why would Marcel Sr leave bits and pieces of this "liquid memory metal" on the floor if it was so exotic and mysterious? Sounds to me that mom thought it to be nothing but simple junk, and young son was just interested in dad's excited work stories in the middle of the night.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-42820435701204775372015-07-21T06:51:38.259-07:002015-07-21T06:51:38.259-07:00@cda
From what Marcel Jr. said in various intervie...@cda<br />From what Marcel Jr. said in various interviews he was told to never say anything about what he saw that night. That could explain why they didn't keep anything. The time frame also seems to confirm Marcel Sr.'s account of taking the better part of a day to collect what they brought back.<br /><br />I can relate to Marcel Jr. in a way because I too held a secret my father told me at about the same age. I should add that I had heard something I wasn't meant to hear in a conversation (more a bitching session) between two of my father's co workers. I bugged my father about it for several days until he told me the story I related earlier. He told me never to say anything about it because he and his friends might lose their jobs. Since many of my classmates were military dependents I'm sure he was concerned that if I said anything it might get back to the base. Marcel Sr. probably had similar concerns.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703256896826354786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-19029181857000858572015-07-21T06:38:06.243-07:002015-07-21T06:38:06.243-07:00Brian -
To quote the director of that movie, Jere...Brian -<br /><br />To quote the director of that movie, Jeremy Kagan, "We're making a movie and not a documentary." Or, in other words, they were making much of it up as they went along for the dramatic effects in the movie.KRandlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333125414889883920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-53436669352772820252015-07-21T06:31:40.192-07:002015-07-21T06:31:40.192-07:00@ Neal -
On Haut - I didn't say Haut was res...@ Neal - <br /><br />On Haut - I didn't say Haut was responsible for photos...the question mark (?) at the of my comment was rhetorical. If the guy was authorized to tell the world aliens had arrived was he also supposed to arrange photos? After all he did contact the media and they do take photos Neal....I was not referring to official base operational procedure...after all believers say they dropped all that "because they were panicked".<br /><br />On debris - Ah...technically by military orders collecting souveniers during wartime is illegal. But they still did it constantly in WW2. If they followed protocols they had to get an officer to approve the trophy item. So if hundreds of thousands of guys didn't follow orders on that issue during wartime, why would they follow it when being lucky enough to be present at "the greatest discovery mankind has ever known?". Oh...I forgot. They were told by a big dark skinned MP they would be "shot"....right.<br /><br />@ CDA - Oh....don't you recall the Roswell movie? Marcel's son kept a piece but his dad had to take it from him...orders you know. A little father-son conflict. Of course, that was all fiction in what people claim was an authentic movie recreation. Marcel Jr. claimed he never kept anything. Why was that represented in this movie?Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-90783040091038070262015-07-21T02:05:22.392-07:002015-07-21T02:05:22.392-07:00Neal Foy:
Regarding your last paragraph, didn'...Neal Foy:<br /><br />Regarding your last paragraph, didn't Marcel bring a lot of that debris home for his wife and son to see, before returning to base? There was nothing to stop them from keeping a small fragment, or even a large one, if they really wanted to. And nobody would have noticed its absence, either. What does the fact that they did not retain any fragments suggest to you? It suggests to me is that it was junk - nothing else.cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-91394927017269945762015-07-21T01:49:21.682-07:002015-07-21T01:49:21.682-07:00Mitram/Martin:
"The centre of the universe i...Mitram/Martin:<br /><br />"The centre of the universe is not in the Ramey memo, as continuously advised."<br /><br />On the contrary, the centre (why not center?) of the universe, plus a great deal else about the universe we live in, is contained in that vital scrap of paper that only a select few can decipher. And who was it that "advised" us otherwise?cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-36280145864152712692015-07-20T19:46:52.909-07:002015-07-20T19:46:52.909-07:00Brian,
The debris Brazel brought to the Sheriff...Brian,<br />The debris Brazel brought to the Sheriff's office didn't stay there very long, by all accounts the Army took it to the base as soon as they were notified. There was a short window to take any pictures of it. In 1947 people didn't have cell phone cameras in their pockets like today. Even if some civilian visited the office during the time the debris was there they would have a hard time taking a picture without a flashbulb attachment on their camera. It's very unlikely that would happen.<br /><br />How do you know there were no pictures or motion pictures taken at the crash site? They would have been taken by the base photo unit and if the Army wanted to hide them they certainly could.<br /><br />You're a huge fan of secret projects, where are all the pictures of those? I can certainly assure you that pictures would be taken for record purposes and to facilitate construction later if they ever went that far. Blueprints don't always reflect "as built" reality.<br /><br />You're contention that Haut would be in charge of taking pictures is actually very funny and shows you to have zero knowledge of how a base photo unit is run. Haut would have absolutely no say on pictures for operations at the base. He could request pictures for his job as public information officer but operations wasn't in his pay grade.<br /><br />As for the soldiers keeping anything, it's highly unlikely they would be told anything more than "Get your butts out there and pick up anything that doesn't look like desert. If you talk about it or keep anything you'll be spending the rest of your life in the brigg". The military doesn't operate under civilian law. They don't need a court order or a warrant to turn a barracks and everything in it upside down if they want to. No soldier in his right mind would try to keep anything under those conditions.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16703256896826354786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-62124967004345494752015-07-20T16:48:14.534-07:002015-07-20T16:48:14.534-07:00@ CDA - photos
Personally I am of the same opinio...@ CDA - photos<br /><br />Personally I am of the same opinion. Toy knowledge no witnesses ever testified to even seeing a photographer at the scene for what is supposedly the greatest discovery of the 20th century.<br /><br />I find that odd when just two years prior GI's, and even individual German soldiers were snapping B&W photos in the tens if not hundreds of thousands during WW2. And they are still out there readily found.<br /><br />How is it that not a single "witness" thought to take a few personal snapshots....and no officer thought of ordering someone to record the "discovery"? And are we supposed to believe that not one of the so called 600-700 "witnesses" claimed by Schmitt and Carey didn't own a camera?<br /><br />GI's during WWII were souvenier hunters - they brought more junk back from Germany and Japan than in any recorded time in war history - personal souveniers. And not one of these guys bothered to slip a tiny piece into his boot while on his hands and knees cleaning it up - after he was told it was from outer space? Really?Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-44509837652500571852015-07-20T16:26:53.827-07:002015-07-20T16:26:53.827-07:00Slightly off topic somebody wrote
"I remind ...Slightly off topic somebody wrote<br /><br />"I remind you that the Top Secret memo that Gen Ramey is supposedly holding in his hand is also on display, for super sharp photo-analysists like David Rudiak and others to decipher and tell the world about decades later!"<br /><br />The centre of the universe is not in the Ramey memo, as continuously advised.<br /><br />I have respect for any rational discussion. If any of your comments happen to ever fall into that realm, I'll be happy to talk with you.Nitramhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09658903255370299035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-27336851002969985662015-07-20T13:54:39.920-07:002015-07-20T13:54:39.920-07:00Kevin,
Yes none of what you lay out above is in c...Kevin,<br /><br />Yes none of what you lay out above is in conflict with the skeptical position. Is it possible that you do not understand that position? Are we talking past each other?<br /><br />LanceLancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17280922104955532058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-25587127549649624642015-07-20T13:00:29.028-07:002015-07-20T13:00:29.028-07:00Kevin:
I like your comment that had the debris be...Kevin:<br /><br />I like your comment that had the debris been of a balloon then photos would have been taken of it at Roswell before it was flownt to Fort Worth. Really?<br /><br />Suppose such photos had been taken, and they showed the same debris as the Fort Worth ones show. The conspiracists (i.e. the proposers of the 'switch' thesis) would STILL be telling us the same story, namely that the switch was done, but at Roswell instead of Fort Worth. So we would be exactly where we are now.<br /><br />Instead of duBose telling us of the switch, someone at the Roswell base would doubtless have told us. And Marcel would say much the same as he did at Ft Worth, i.e. virtually nothing of value. <br /><br />Your argument about the lack of photos at Roswell only indicates to me that nobody there thought the debris was important enough to photograph; the reason being that Ramey had ordered it flown to Ft Worth and Blanchard (or whoever) decided to do that immediately. Photographs were considered unnecessary! Ramey obviously took a different view and had a press photographer come out for this purpose, hoping to satisfy public opinion. The whole 'switch' idea is just fiction, and always was. But it forms a major role in the great conspiracy thesis.cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-89452031260546919852015-07-20T11:46:25.987-07:002015-07-20T11:46:25.987-07:00Well…if we put a moratorium on Mogul then I would ...Well…if we put a moratorium on Mogul then I would propose more consideration be given to alternate theories on what actually happened there other than ‘aliens’ since there isn’t any more data that can or has been collected to discuss other than reported bits and pieces of metallic type magnesium which proves nothing really.<br />Again…while most here hate to even consider Redfern’s theory, it might be worthwhile exploring a clearly rational hypothesis a bit further.<br /><br />Why? There is clear evidence that testing on human subjects, generally unfortunates, was being done for high altitude and radiation exposure research. The documents he cites in his book are real. If you couple that with other facts not included in his book that precede what he describes, you get the following in a nut shell:<br /><br />1) 1947 – A race in the early stage of the cold war to extract as much as you can from captured Japanese and German technology, including chemical and biological weapons coupled with research on human radiation exposure.<br /><br />2) Documents just three months prior to Roswell stating that all human test research is classified ultra-secret, and that under no circumstances can the public know about what they are doing to humans illegally (yes the documents exist- research it). Furthermore if the public does discover it, they are to be discredited and misdirected.<br /><br />3) US weapons research on high altitude disposal of radioactive material as an offensive weapon over the Soviet Union using balloons, since development of sub-orbital aircraft and intercontinental rockets were not sufficiently capable of doing the job at the time.<br /><br />4) Documents stating that in summary, the research conducted on the human unfortunates involved in the high altitude tests resulted in aerial crashes – and that the crashes were due to very specific reasons – cited include: a) the unfortunates could not reach the controls, b) the unfortunates could not understand the purposely created “symbols” used to help them fly the craft (Humm…remember the geometric symbols on Marcel’s debris?), etc.<br /><br />5) Documents stating that the tests also included aircraft flown in the prone position...humm…the only US aircraft that ever flew in prone position in the late 1945-1948 time period was Northrup’s XP-79 flying wing – which was reportedly cancelled after several flight tests and a fatal crash. So…what were they still flying in a prone position then…??? A Horton wing contraption? Or did they continue to develop the XP-79 and variants?<br /> <br />6) There are documents that attest to the fact that there was concern over what the outcome would be from the Nuremburg trials on human research….and that since those involved in doing it secretly in the US for military purposes would be “found out”, they had to cover it up even further or abandon it based on the trial and its outcomes.<br /><br />7) Documents even show that we were flying full scale aircraft as remotely controlled “drones” from trailing aircraft at this time and even before.<br /><br />8) Advanced German aircraft materials were being tested and evaluated at that time – specifically wood and resin composite material, plastics, and lightweight and heat resistant metals like magnesium alloys which were being used in the development of the 1944 blue-prints of the F-86 prototype flown in 1948..…is it possible they were testing these materials even before 1948?<br /><br />Sounds like another very plausible hypothesis with some supporting facts that may indicate what we have at Roswell is a secret project buried in another classified project that was not connected to anything else that can be traced or tracked easily. In other words a prosaic explanation.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11558306.post-58031408270382127292015-07-20T10:56:58.041-07:002015-07-20T10:56:58.041-07:00@ Kevin -
Interesting comment about Cavitt - had ...@ Kevin -<br /><br />Interesting comment about Cavitt - had not heard that before. Not saying you're wrong, but Cavitt"s claim about not picking up balloon debris would still be accurate if he went out there, saw a balloon, and went back and didn't participate in the recovery. Marcel thinking it was still odd starting the clean up anyway.<br /><br />Was there any indication from your investigations that photos of the debris were ever taken? On base or in the field? <br /><br />Most aircraft crashes are photographed even back then. I would presume that if this was something "unworldly" someone would have been detailed to photograph it. Probably out of Haut's area?<br /><br />Many false claims to movies taken, but in reality it probably would have been B&W photos.Brian Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04201018843054563257noreply@blogger.com