Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

Roswell was Soviet plot to create US panic


  • Please log in to reply
438 replies to this topic

#361    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,268 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

  • We are all made of thermonuclear waste material

Posted 21 June 2011 - 10:11 AM

View Postmcrom901, on 21 June 2011 - 09:57 AM, said:

what standards are we supposed to abide by here? please enlighten.... or is it just your perceived version of 'morality'?

This board has rules governing the accuracy of material posted and the requirements for posting sources... perhaps you're not familiar with them...?

Quote

is it just about cherry picking "mistakes"? or addressing what is being discussed.... can you honestly show where sky "denies" about the 'bragalia quote' exactly?

He says his point has "nothing to do with Anthony Bragalia" after being shown that the quote he is using to make his point could only have come from Bragalia.

Do you not see that as a denial?

Quote

did he even address it?

Someone approaching this (or any) discussion honestly would admit their mistake when presented with facts showing the origins of their quote.




Cz

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe..." - Carl Sagan

"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." – H. L. Mencken

#362    mcrom901

mcrom901

    plasmoid ninja

  • Member
  • 5,602 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:multiverse

  • space debris, decided to evolve and become us!

Posted 21 June 2011 - 10:36 AM

View PostCzero 101, on 21 June 2011 - 10:11 AM, said:

This board has rules governing the accuracy of material posted and the requirements for posting sources... perhaps you're not familiar with them...?

i'm familiar... but didn't know that you were a moderator.... the report button is your friend...

View PostCzero 101, on 21 June 2011 - 10:11 AM, said:

He says his point has "nothing to do with Anthony Bragalia" after being shown that the quote he is using to make his point could only have come from Bragalia.

Do you not see that as a denial?

still then... he didn't deny the context you're referring to... your above mini-quote from him is out of context btw... in light of the previous sentence, its not that difficult to know as to what he is referring to...

View PostCzero 101, on 21 June 2011 - 10:11 AM, said:

Someone approaching this (or any) discussion honestly would admit their mistake when presented with facts showing the origins of their quote.

since he did not thank you for providing the actual source / full quote... does that mean you should chase him ad infinitum off-topic'ly to prove that he is dishonest or whatever.... and with his further ignoring addressing that issue does not automatically mean that he denies it or you should add up all those personal characterizations...

say your peace and move on man.... in any  case, i'm done here... i hope you don't twist my intended point here by applying reductionism to typos...  :tu:

Edited by mcrom901, 21 June 2011 - 10:56 AM.


#363    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,051 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 21 June 2011 - 10:39 AM

View PostCzero 101, on 21 June 2011 - 10:11 AM, said:




He says his point has "nothing to do with Anthony Bragalia" after being shown that the quote he is using to make his point could only have come from Bragalia.

Do you not see that as a denial?


Cz

Hey Cz, exactly his point is not what was said exactly or by whom, it was that the word Roswell was mentioned prior to 1970, as he was challenged to do. So I agree in that it has nothing to do with Bragalia, unless ofcourse Bragalia's quote adds in the word Roswell and then the word is not found in the book quoted...this would be relevant and dishonest (or possibly just bad research) either way this is not the case on this point.


#364    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Mainly Spherical in Shape

  • Member
  • 25,117 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 21 June 2011 - 12:45 PM

This is yet another argument that I'm getting thoroughly confused by. It all sounds rather like the Macarthur argument a few weeks back, when someone claimed he said something which it turned out that he did in fact say, only not at the time claimed, or something like that.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#365    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 21 June 2011 - 01:15 PM

I should leave this alone...  but, it should be clarified...

View Post747400, on 21 June 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

This is yet another argument that I'm getting thoroughly confused by. It all sounds rather like the Macarthur argument a few weeks back, when someone claimed he said something which it turned out that he did in fact say, only not at the time claimed, or something like that.
Actually, MacArthur didn't "in fact say" the quote in question at any time.

But this thread isn't about MacArthur, so I'll just leave it at that.  Feel free to review the points in the BE thread if they are still confusing, or PM me for details if you'd like.


#366    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,156 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 21 June 2011 - 05:14 PM

View Postquillius, on 21 June 2011 - 10:39 AM, said:

Hey Cz, exactly his point is not what was said exactly or by whom, it was that the word Roswell was mentioned prior to 1970, as he was challenged to do. So I agree in that it has nothing to do with Bragalia, unless ofcourse Bragalia's quote adds in the word Roswell and then the word is not found in the book quoted...this would be relevant and dishonest (or possibly just bad research) either way this is not the case on this point.

Thank you!

As it has been shown, Roswell was in fact, mentioned before the 1970s in multiple publications.  Even the reference posted by Cz, Roswell was highllighted in yellow,

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#367    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,846 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:25 PM

We would all be Rich beond belief If we had a Dollar for every time someone on this BE thread started a reply with " Show me "
Where did it say ! or a few other quotes from the grey matter gone wild !
Just to type "Roswell" Gets all the blood flowing to the Grey matter well enough !
How about Look for some new doc`s on Pre-1950 Roswell reff`s?

This is a Work in Progress!

#368    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,156 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:37 PM

View Post747400, on 21 June 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

This is yet another argument that I'm getting thoroughly confused by. It all sounds rather like the Macarthur argument a few weeks back, when someone claimed he said something which it turned out that he did in fact say, only not at the time claimed, or something like that.

I could understand where you are coming from.

He did in fact, speak those words and if anyone who have dealt with the press, would see why, and I highlighted certain words, that were posted in part by the newspaper. I have dealt for years with the press and even provided proof-read drafts of a student in flight training to the Fairfield Daily Republic and to the Vacaville Reporter. In both cases, the news folks edit out portions of the interviews, just as they had done here in Corpus Christi where three TV news stations and the local newspaper covered  exhibits in my shop and on the USS Lexington, not to mention the news interview at the airport, which is still online with my photo and that of another airman, so yes, he spoke those words and not all were printed but enough were printed  and highlighted to back my point.

I might also add that another poster here was present during my exhibition on the USS Lexington where one of the interviews was conducted with another airman..

In regards to the interviews of the airmen whom I flew in, their interviews were edited and not every word they spoken were presented, but published in part in the newspaper and on the TV news stations anyway. That is the way the press works, and I was also part of a cover-up while serving in the Air Force as well, but not involving UFOs, which gives an advantage to see things in the original Roswell headline that others tend to overlook. For an example, the phone lines were jammed, and the press was getting on the nerves of the military, and we must also remember the mission of the 509th Bomber Group, so it was imperative to get the phone lines unjammed and to not only cover-up the recoveries, but to get the press off of their backs as noted by Dubose.

The Roswell headline was indicative of what was reportedly recovered as the military should have known that making such recoveries public, would have caused a lot of problems, but they was so excited at the time, that it resulted in that famous Roswell headline. Once Pandora's Box was opened, it was too late and the only course of action to be taken was to cover-up with something mundane, and in this case, a weather balloon because the Roswell incident was affecting normal operations at the base and things had to get back to normal as quickly as possible.

There is nothing there to suggest that th Soviets were responsible. Years ago, a KGB agent was interviewed on TV and he mentioned that the Roswell news story is what brought special attention to the Soviets, particularly, Joseph Stalin.


Attached Files


Edited by skyeagle409, 21 June 2011 - 07:10 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#369    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,156 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:45 PM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 21 June 2011 - 06:25 PM, said:

We would all be Rich beond belief If we had a Dollar for every time someone on this BE thread started a reply with " Show me "
Where did it say ! or a few other quotes from the grey matter gone wild !
Just to type "Roswell" Gets all the blood flowing to the Grey matter well enough !
How about Look for some new doc`s on Pre-1950 Roswell reff`s?

I expect more informaton to be revealed  on the Roswell incident as more and more folks are coming out into the open. So, it has been shown that Roswell was in fact, mentioned before the 1970s, which was my point all along and another reason why I asked Czero101  to confirm to everyone here, that the reference he provided, had Roswell hightlighted in yellow

. I would also like to ask him to point out the date of that publication in which the word: Roswell, is highlighted in yellow.

Edited by skyeagle409, 21 June 2011 - 06:53 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#370    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,156 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 21 June 2011 - 07:01 PM

View PostCzero 101, on 21 June 2011 - 09:10 AM, said:

No, I'm not saying that at all. In fact, if you look back a few pages you'll see that I posted a screenshot of the Google search of the book.
Cz

Question is, Did the reference you posted yesterday, contain the word: "Roswell" which was highlighted in yellow?  What was the date of that publication you posted the reference from?

Edited by skyeagle409, 21 June 2011 - 07:02 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#371    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,833 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 June 2011 - 12:40 AM

View Postquillius, on 21 June 2011 - 09:47 AM, said:

I agree, although I dont see Sky as being dishonest here. Maybe he didnt research the source of the quote properly (as you yourself noticed), but this doesnt take away from the fact that he was challenged to find somewhere that mentioned Roswell and that is what he tried to do.

Surely we are losing the initial points that they were discussing, in that Roswell is mentioned prior to 1970.

Hi Quillius

It would be prudent to do a quick search on the BE threads. This is an argument that has been brought up many times before. Lost Shaman may have been a little general in his wording this time around is all. Yes, The Roswell Incident received a smattering of exposure. You could count the times it came up over the space of 30 years on your fingers. That is the point. I am quite positive I have said so as well. And those references claim Balloons. Only a fictional novel, which it would be ludicrous to claim was not inspired by Roswell residents, claims something more than balloons. I asked for an Alien reference prior to 1979. One cannot say Roswell was never discussed, the RDR has been displayed more times than I care to mention. I am sorry to see that you think this was a challenge of some sort. Lost Shaman made a comment that Sky took to extremes, fueled by old lost arguments. I really do not care if he posts 9 or 10 references, which would be a struggle, that fact remains that Roswell was by large not discussed for 30 years. Then in 1979 one Stanton Friedman came along and sensationalised the tale, and injected Aliens into the story. If it was that talk of the town, I would expect to easily find in excess of 500 references. That is what Sky originally alluded to. I actually remember saying to him that Roswell was still not as important as he makes out - if I asked ten people in the street who Jesse Marcel was, I doubt I would get a single one who could answer me.
Sky is just trying to turn this onto me and make it personal so that he can in some way claim victory over me. Have you not noticed the unusual amount of attention he gives me? He has been chomping at the bit for ages on that one.


View Postquillius, on 21 June 2011 - 09:47 AM, said:

If the rest of the text was relevant then I could understand the attack on source and the snipping of text being seen as dishonest and misleading, however the text is not relevant and the only relevance is the mention of the word 'Roswell'......when I say relevant I mean relevant to the point they were discussing, I am not saying it is relevant to proving Roswell, but hey if they choose that line of debate who am I to argue, plus you never know where it may lead :)

Yet Sky said it was reported, and then gave us a fictional novel! That is not a report. All Cz is doing is illustrating yet more deliberate cherry picking. He has no horse in this race, he is running his own. There are many aspect of this discussion, Cz's point is merely but one of them.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#372    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,833 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 June 2011 - 12:41 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 21 June 2011 - 08:47 AM, said:

Apparently, they obtain reports because you will note the similarities to what has been reported in regards to the Roswell incident and what has been  published. So, the fact remains; Roswell was brought up before the 1970s.


I did not say it was not brought up, I said it was rarely brought up. Have done so many times, and you have posted the look articles many times. Now you include a novel.

Any reference to Aliens in the magazines?

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#373    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,833 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 June 2011 - 12:51 AM

Did anyone actually read Cz's post? He did not say Roswell was not in the book, rather the opposite in this post.

He says:

Quote

The quote does appear on page 76 as referenced. I searched for "rancher" and found it right away. The Google search probably can't find "Roswell" since the word gets hyphenated to "Ros-well" due it "wrapping" to the next line of text.

ETA...

Unfortunately we are not able to get more information or the rest of the quote, but it does look like the actual text that Skyeagle quotes is accurate for only the first sentence.
While the link he provides does go to an Amazon page about the book in question, it does not actually reference the text he has posted in his quote.




Cz

Can anyone point out to me where Cz said Roswell was not in the book? Sky seems to think otherwise

Quote

Question is, Did the reference you posted yesterday, contain the word: "Roswell" which was highlighted in yellow? What was the date of that publication you posted the reference from?  

As we can see above, Cz bloody well told us all HOW to find it!

What is going on here people? Cz's line of questioning the reference is perfectly valid. He did not say Roswell was not in the book, he did not say Roswell was not mentioned. Why can he not object to the cherry picking his diligent efforts uncovered? Is it merely pity for the underdog that I am witnessing here?

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#374    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,833 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 June 2011 - 12:52 AM

View Post747400, on 21 June 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

This is yet another argument that I'm getting thoroughly confused by. It all sounds rather like the Macarthur argument a few weeks back, when someone claimed he said something which it turned out that he did in fact say, only not at the time claimed, or something like that.


Bet you are glad you mentioned Macarthur....... :unsure2:

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#375    lost_shaman

lost_shaman

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,495 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:TEXAS

Posted 22 June 2011 - 01:02 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 22 June 2011 - 12:40 AM, said:

Hi Quillius

It would be prudent to do a quick search on the BE threads. This is an argument that has been brought up many times before. Lost Shaman may have been a little general in his wording this time around is all.

Wait... Hold on here. I wasn't being general! I was talking specifically about Marcel trying to convince Newton in front of the Press on July 8th, 1947. Then I said (as far as we know) he didn't say a damn word about it again to anyone until the mid-to-late 1970's. This discussion of references to Roswell before then have nothing to do with the FACT that Marcel didn't mention it all those years.

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. - Friedrich Nietzsche




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users