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.


* * * * * 1 votes

Roswell guard ordered to 'shoot to kill'


  • Please log in to reply
203 replies to this topic

#121    Technocrat

Technocrat

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Joined:02 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

  • "In a perfect world, every dog would have a home and every home would have a dog." Anon.

    "Art is what you can get away with." Andy Warhol.

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:09 AM

View Postbadeskov, on 22 April 2013 - 02:09 AM, said:

How about Bessie Brazel, who is one of the witnesses and never changed her story.

Cheers,
Badeskov

WRONG BK! Mack Brazel's late daughter Bessie was initially one of the Air Force's star witnesses in their July 1994 Project Mogul report by supporting the Air Force's contention that her father had recovered a high altitude balloon in the first week of July 1947. In recent years before she died, however, she recanted that position and conceded, "It was another occurrence altogether. I had helped my dad gather up weather balloons on a number of occasions. I have come to the conclusion that what my dad found back at that time was something else altogether." :P

Edited by MrSerendipity, 23 April 2013 - 12:12 AM.

Posted Image


​"​A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely fool proof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams.

#122    Esoteric Toad

Esoteric Toad

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 689 posts
  • Joined:04 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Where does one get certified as an "Ancient Astronaut Theorist" or "Cryptozoologist"?

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:24 AM

Really at this point if the government say,"You're right it was an alien flying saucer that crashed at Roswell" and  the CT's would think it was a cover up.

What I find curious if the fact that the term "flying saucer" was created by a reporter in 1947 to describe something that was not saucer shaped. He took a sort of poetic license and then all UFO's (for the most part) were suddenly all saucer shaped after the story made the newspapers......coincidence? The power of suggestion...still going on today.


#123    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 29,786 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:27 AM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

There has been too much quoting since my last reply to go back and do the point and counter point thing, especially with p101.  What I will say is pretty brief and simple;

No there has not, you are just a lazy poster.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

p101 says that I am operating on an opinion or popular media belief in the Roswell myth.  

Indeed you are, and have not given indication otherwise.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

Which is pretty funny, considering that we humans all have an opinion on any given topic one way or the other.  

Opinion is fine, belief is fine, you are not entitled to your own facts. Amazingly I have3 an opinion as well, and my opinion is insulted by an attack on logic and facts.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

It seems as though p101 is content to ridicule those who have contradictory beliefs to his own, which is fine.  

Is that how you describe badly losing a debate? This is after all a discussion forum. You are trying to tell me there are facts that indicate the incident that the Roswell Incident was a UFO crash, but that is poppycock. No more than a camp fire story.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

Not everyone will agree on topics especially ones as controversially debated as the "Roswell incident" as it is referred to.  

I gave you direct evidence that completely disproves your circumstantial evidence, I even gave you a page out of the reports you keep quoting, proving you are quoting misinformation and have not read the reports at all, but feel qualified to dimiss them? Am I supposed to take that seriously?

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

I could spend hours upon hours finding documents online and doing the point by point debate much like p101 does well.  

I do not need hours. Your claims are pretty easy to knock over as they have been regurgitated through the media for decades now. That is what I am trying to point out to you - the separation between fact and fantasy, you seem to take offence to facts if they mess with your fantasy.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

I very rarely post on here and when I do, it is simply for fun and discussing of these unexplained mysteries[which is the point of this forum, is it not?].  

Me too, hence the pictures that you consider ridicule. A little levity goes a long way I find to break up the monotony, and keep these things from getting overheated. Discussion is indeed the point of this forum. If you wish to just post some place and not have other opinions discuss said information, and disprove it if it be wrong, then what you seek is a blog. There you can just say what you want and other not allow comments, or filter them to suit your agenda.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

I liken Mr. P101 to a scientific debate team leader, he loves the being the guy who knows everything, despite the fact that much of us are operating under our own set of beliefs.  Which in itself makes the ridiculing thing quite childish.

You flatter me. I learn as much here as I share, to me that is the point of the forum. Discussion, a change of ideas and the possibility of solving a mystery. Maybe more like the mystery machine than a scientific debate I would think, as a debate would probably be rather ruthless, quick and painless.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

I will say this as well, to dismiss guys like George Knapp, Philip Corso, Jesse Marcel, and Stanton Friedman is quite oblivious and ignorant.  

To out them blindly is much worse. You have not been able to counter one argument. ith the information that was provided what was it? Like 60 discrepancies that other UFOlogists picked up? And these were his peers! And your blind following of Friedman again shows your just a poster boy. Can you deny that he is hat father of the Roswell Aliens? I see you added George Knapp to the list, would you like to discuss his claims "individually"? I reckon he is planted to make UFO nuts look even kookier!

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

These guys had direct knowledge of the actual events[Marcel and Corso] and the others like Knapp & Friedman have spent considerable amounts of time researching this topic.  Just read "The Day After Roswell" by Philip Corso or "Alien Agenda" by Jim Marrs.  

What's the name of Corso's book again? Ohh yeah, the Day After. That would be accurate, he missed the entire show but still wanted a piece of it, as I said, every claim he has made is not doubted by me, but [roven wrong by history itself, you have more than just a skeptic on your hands to qualify those erratic claims. Same if you want to discuss Marr's book, it is full of contradictions. Just throwing the names out there means very little. You have not even said what it is about these marvellous authors and such that you feel is convincing, you just point at a title.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

These books offer not only circumstantial evidence that the Roswell event was indeed a UFO related happening, but also compile the best of UFO sightings and abductions and other topics related to the overall scope of everything that ties back into Roswell.  

And what about the real world evidence that I have presented that tears this circumstantial evidence to shreds? You have not had the gumption to discuss so much as one point, you just show up every few days and have a whine and repeat yourself. Pretty disapoiting actually, I had hoped for more from you.
Would you prefer that everyone just pretends the real evidence simply does not exist. and ohh and ahh over the made up stuff?

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

And last, but not least, is J. Allen Hynek.  He was the governments researcher into all of these UFO cases on Project Blue Book who went in as an admitted skeptic and became a believer.  He seen these cases up close and personally investigated them as they happened.  How do you explain an admitted skeptic like Hynek becoming a believer?  

I have already adressed this for you, read these words from J Allen Hynek would you, this is after all the second time I have posted them recently.

His main point led him to the title of his speech: "The Embarrassment of the Riches." He was aware that the quantity of UFO sightings was much higher than the Project Blue Book statistics. Just this puzzled him. "A few good sightings a year, over the world, would bolster the extraterrestrial hypothesis—but many thousands every year? From remote regions of space? And to what purpose? To scare us by stopping cars, and disturbing animals, and puzzling us with their seemingly pointless antics?"

You guys just like to misinterpret in investigation as proof of ET. You have it all wrong. You guys who love Hynek also dumped in him big time, I have mentioned this many times recently as well, perhaps this time you may read it?

In late March 1966, in Michigan, two days of mass UFO sightings were reported, and received significant publicity. After studying the reports, Hynek offered a provisional hypothesis for some of the sightings: a few of about 100 witnesses had mistaken swamp gas for something more spectacular. At the press conference where he made his announcement, Hynek repeatedly and strenuously made the qualification that swamp gas was a plausible explanation for only a portion of the Michigan UFO reports, and certainly not for UFO reports in general. But much to his chagrin, Hynek's qualifications were largely overlooked, and the words "swamp gas" were repeated ad infinitum in relation to UFO reports. The explanation was subject to national derision.



yeah good going fellas, dump on the best chance you ever had. Now you ar stuck with the likes of Friedman, Mier, Lazar.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

No, that does not support Roswell that Mr. Hynek believed there was something to the phenomena, but it does tie back into the event indirectly.  

Not at all, read Hyneks quotes above.



Remember how he worked for the Government? Remember how he was upset that investigations were not honest in his opinion? He would know if there was something to know right? But he is quoted as saying:

In the November 21, 1977 (page 97) edition of Newsweek ("The UFO's Are Coming") by Peter Gwynne and Katrine Ames, Hynek is quoted as saying: "We have the questions, not the answers".

Now is it just me, or do I seem to know a great deal more about your hero than you do?


View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

It all started with Kenneth Arnold and Roswell.  

Kenneth Arnold too thought what he saw was man made, and not from space, he said so in a letter the the military. IS this more of your "circumstantial evidence"? Because it is just rehashed media nonsense.

Posted Image


Note that Kenneth Arnolds own words are "I felt certain they belonged to the Government"


View Postconspiracy buff, on 22 April 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:


Those were the two main events that started the UFO field of research.  

And you are spreading the media version of events, which has absolutely nothing to do with the actual phenomena, how else do you explain the above information?


And I'm quite sure p101 will counter that Hynek was a nut or that his research didn't matter or whatever the counterpoint may be.  


I did not do that at all, but the real sad part is this is like the third or fourth time I have quoted this man, and the above information over the last couple of weeks. It is very rude of you to skip all the posting in the meantime or pretend it never existed, and then just keep regurgitating the same horse hockey over and again. As far as I am aware this is a discussion forum, and discussion its a two way street, and you are not the one directing traffic. Free speech being used as it was meant to be. I wont swallow your snake oil. Or the medias.


The mere fact that we have multiple investigators doing independent research and coming up with similar results is telling.  


All coming up with nothing? That is telling.

The only actual results we have that explain any of the UFO's from antiquity are fro meteorology and physics. Sprites, plasmas - the 4th state of matter - and earthlights are being demystified before our very eyes. Hessdalen being a crowning achievement. UFOlogists just write tall tales.


To keep dismissing all of the circumstantial evidence on Roswell and other UFO incidents is quite arrogant and contrary to finding the truth, whatever that may be.  


I di not dismiss it, I prove it wrong, that be where you and I part ways. You seem to think repeatability strengthens validity? Why that is I have no idea.

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. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#124    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 29,786 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:30 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 22 April 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

:no:

"The Polaroid Corporation was founded in 1937 by Edwin H. Land. It is most famous for its instant film cameras, which reached the market in 1948, and continued to be the company's flaghip product line." Link here: http://camerapedia.w...m/wiki/Polaroid


"1948: Instant photography goes on sale to the public for the first time with the Polaroid Model 95, which gets its name from its $95 starting price." Link here:http://www.stuff.tv/...-instant-camera

"The introduction of the Polaroid Land camera, in 1948, marks the beginning of the brand's legacy in instant photography." Link here:http://www.polaroid.com.au/history

You said:


Posted ImageMrSerendipity, on 20 April 2013 - 06:56 AM, said:


I don't think they had polaroids in 1947! :no:



They did, still, check that which I bloded and coloured for you , and get back to me ;)

Edited by psyche101, 23 April 2013 - 12:32 AM.

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. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#125    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 29,786 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:34 AM

View PostScudbuster, on 22 April 2013 - 10:51 AM, said:

This is not the dialog in the video I posted.....

Do you know if a dialogue is online, and does it clear up any of the questions you had before you read it?

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. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#126    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 29,786 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:37 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 22 April 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

Let me first of all say CB, that I also find there are often too many quotes to answer and they seem to be coming thick and fast with this particular topic. I don't think I'll be giving it too much more of my time as I have other things in my life to deal with! I will soon be un-following this topic as my email inbox is chocker-blocked every morning with new replies! Just to add a little bit extra to your comment: Professor Hynek was actually a paid government debunker as well as a skeptic, (and astronomer), who slowly, over a period of time, converted to believing that there was something to the UFO phenomenon. The following link will give you a very interesting read about his experiences: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Allen_Hynek


Already given to CB, but reading does not seem to be the strong point of an FTB.


This is from your link, which just happens to be the one I keep offering:



The Embarrassment of the Riches." He was aware that the quantity of UFO sightings was much higher than the Project Blue Book statistics. Just this puzzled him. "A few good sightings a year, over the world, would bolster the extraterrestrial hypothesis—but many thousands every year? From remote regions of space? And to what purpose? To scare us by stopping cars, and disturbing animals, and puzzling us with their seemingly pointless antics?"

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. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#127    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 29,786 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:41 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 22 April 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

An outright silly idea? Did you get that from an informed source or are you simply 'informing by proclamation'? I don't think it's likely there would be as intense radiation in interstellar space as would be emitted by high energy radar here on earth. Of course I haven't been out there to carry out any measurements and neither have you! To encounter dangerously high levels of radiation in interstellar space I think it would be necessary to journey dangerously close to a star.

Have you heard of the "Voyager" probes?

Entering Interstellar space right now. They give us a darn good idea of what is "out there" as that is where they are.

It is preposterous to consider that RADAR or a radio emission would cause such grief to an advanced craft. Have you ever seen Jupiter? Our wildest storms are likend to a clam balmy day by comparison. To think Aliens are caught by surprise in this peaceful environment is quite a tall order, and you need to evidence that if claiming this actually happened, because evidence to suggest the contrary exists in bounds. Indeed, it is a rather silly notion when you understand emissions.

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. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#128    Technocrat

Technocrat

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Joined:02 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

  • "In a perfect world, every dog would have a home and every home would have a dog." Anon.

    "Art is what you can get away with." Andy Warhol.

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:45 AM

View PostDBunker, on 21 April 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

I have no idea where you read this sci-fy nonsense..... maybe you need to check your sources.

Try this smart ass! http://xenophilius.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/is-secret-government-radar-cause-the-ufo-crash-at-roswell/ And there are many other accounts of military radar as being a possible cause of the flying saucers to crash at Roswell but I haven't got the time to dig them out just to please you! :passifier:

Posted Image


​"​A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely fool proof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams.

#129    Esoteric Toad

Esoteric Toad

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 689 posts
  • Joined:04 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Where does one get certified as an "Ancient Astronaut Theorist" or "Cryptozoologist"?

Posted 23 April 2013 - 12:48 AM

Of course us low-tech humans can have thousands of planes in the air 24/7 and they are not dropping out of the sky due to any sort of radar..... :w00t:

How could they travel in interstellar space without fear of micrometeorites, neutrons, cosmic radiation, xrays and the whole myriad of radiation infinitely more powerful than anything we could hope to have/make?

Space is NOT a biological creature friendly place.

Edited by Esoteric Toad, 23 April 2013 - 12:51 AM.


#130    Scudbuster

Scudbuster

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 499 posts
  • Joined:24 Mar 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana

  • "This Train will stop at Tucumcari"

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:04 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 April 2013 - 12:34 AM, said:

Do you know if a dialogue is online, and does it clear up any of the questions you had before you read it?

That's a good question - I do not know. I was thinking about trying to transcribe it when I have the time - but unfortunately that commodity has been in very short supply as of late.

I'm not sure why you can't see thre link I posted - you may want to try and go directly on YouTube yourself and simply search on his name. It's an interview he gave shortly before he died. As far as I know, it's the only video interview he ever did.


#131    Technocrat

Technocrat

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Joined:02 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

  • "In a perfect world, every dog would have a home and every home would have a dog." Anon.

    "Art is what you can get away with." Andy Warhol.

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:06 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 April 2013 - 12:41 AM, said:

Have you heard of the "Voyager" probes?

Entering Interstellar space right now. They give us a darn good idea of what is "out there" as that is where they are.

It is preposterous to consider that RADAR or a radio emission would cause such grief to an advanced craft. Have you ever seen Jupiter? Our wildest storms are likend to a clam balmy day by comparison. To think Aliens are caught by surprise in this peaceful environment is quite a tall order, and you need to evidence that if claiming this actually happened, because evidence to suggest the contrary exists in bounds. Indeed, it is a rather silly notion when you understand emissions.

Of course I have heard of the Voyager probes and I am fully aware that they are now entering interstellar space. Can you give me some idea of what levels of radiation they are encountering right now? Are you able to receive and decode their signals? And what in the name of goodness has Jupiter got to do with anything? Anyway, I'm not saying that radar was definitely the cause of the UFOs crashing at Roswell, just that it has been proposed as a possibility. After all it has frequently been stated by credible people who have had UFO encounters, (and in a well know case by a police officer. If you want the link I can let you have it), that the electrics in their cars went dead while a UFO was close by and that they, (the electrics), came back on when the UFO disappeared. So it seems feasible that it could also happen the other way around.

Edited by MrSerendipity, 23 April 2013 - 01:06 AM.

Posted Image


​"​A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely fool proof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams.

#132    Esoteric Toad

Esoteric Toad

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 689 posts
  • Joined:04 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Where does one get certified as an "Ancient Astronaut Theorist" or "Cryptozoologist"?

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:13 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 23 April 2013 - 01:06 AM, said:

Of course I have heard of the Voyager probes and I am fully aware that they are now entering interstellar space. Can you give me some idea of what levels of radiation they are encountering right now? Are you able to receive and decode their signals? And what in the name of goodness has Jupiter got to do with anything? Anyway, I'm not saying that radar was definitely the cause of the UFOs crashing at Roswell, just that it has been proposed as a possibility. After all it has frequently been stated by credible people who have had UFO encounters, (and in a well know case by a police officer. If you want the link I can let you have it), that the electrics in their cars went dead while a UFO was close by and that they, (the electrics), came back on when the UFO disappeared. So it seems feasible that it could also happen the other way around.
With the shear number of reports of UFO's/Alien space ships flying about why do we not have mass traffic jams caused by one just happening to fly by? Most sightings involve one or small numbers of people oddly enough. That doesn't solve the contradiction though since the 'ship' would still have to fly from somewhere to where the witnesses would be. I cannot recall ever hearing a story where dozens of cars quit working on an interstate or any other road.

This is the problem, the stories cannot be verified at all. They are nothing more than stories and Roswell as you are presenting it is just another story with zero real evidence to support it.


#133    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,871 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:19 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 23 April 2013 - 12:45 AM, said:

Try this smart ass! http://xenophilius.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/is-secret-government-radar-cause-the-ufo-crash-at-roswell/ And there are many other accounts of military radar as being a possible cause of the flying saucers to crash at Roswell but I haven't got the time to dig them out just to please you! :passifier:

We have seen that and, no, it has no merit.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#134    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,871 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:21 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 23 April 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

WRONG BK! Mack Brazel's late daughter Bessie was initially one of the Air Force's star witnesses in their July 1994 Project Mogul report by supporting the Air Force's contention that her father had recovered a high altitude balloon in the first week of July 1947. In recent years before she died, however, she recanted that position and conceded, "It was another occurrence altogether. I had helped my dad gather up weather balloons on a number of occasions. I have come to the conclusion that what my dad found back at that time was something else altogether." :P

Maybe you can help me and quote where Bessie stated that?

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#135    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,871 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:25 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 22 April 2013 - 10:36 PM, said:


If the 0.5 watt output from a mobile phone can interfere with an aircraft's systems how much more interference might be caused by high intensity radar? And I'm not talking about the standard radar that is used at airports.

It is a good point, although not a valid one. While there is certainly some concern regarding aircraft and cell phones, it is more playing it safe as there could be interference. But that said, you completely missed the point. The intensity of electromagnetic radiation in space far surpasses what any radar system here on Earth emits. Thus if ET can make it as far as to here, then they will have no problem with radar systems of Terra Firma.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users