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

#76    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,695 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 22 April 2013 - 12:22 AM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 21 April 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:



You do something to p*** off Zeus or what? :lol:

Glad to hear that it'll take more than a few zaps to take you out, I think you might be missed around here. :tu:

Coming from Scandinavia, I probably p***ed of Thor! That said, I am like a bad cold so I won't go away that easily...

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.

#77    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:10 AM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 19 April 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

THANK YOU!!!!!

Anthony Bragalia is your saviour?

Desperation has no bounds I take it.

Posted Image


View Postconspiracy buff, on 19 April 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

Any serious research into the Roswell event notices a lot of alarming inconsistencies and outright contradictory happenstances in the governments accounts of what actually happened.  First, it was claimed that it was a captured UFO.  That was an official press release by the army and by those who could obviously tell the difference between a downed weather balloon and possible ET craft.  You're telling me that these people trusted with the most cutting edge technology of their modern times could NOT tell the difference between a weather balloon and something from another world?  That has always been a glaringly inconsistent point of the Roswell story that did not make any logical sense.  Ok, then it is retracted and then told to the public that it was a simple weather balloon.  If you assume the above was true, you'd have to ask why the government would cover this up?  It is simple; government has always feared a perceived loss of control and power with these types of revelations.  One need look no further than the War of the Worlds scare back in 1938 to see proof of how widespread panic can cause those in control to worry;

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/welles-scares-nation

Can we see some of this "serious research" from you please? I am seeing a personal version of the tale, which is led along ny the nose with the old media version of events.

Serious research? You have started out with a fabrication! The initial story never said UFO, just something you made up because you heard it in the media. The media erroneously, and no doubt for the sake of sensation called what the Army had described as a "Flying Disc" a 'Flying Saucer".

Here, have a look yourself. You are dead set a poster boy for the media.

As described in the July 9, 1947, edition of the Roswell Daily Record:

The balloon which held it up, if that was how it worked, must have been 12 feet long, [Brazel] felt, measuring the distance by the size of the room in which he sat. The rubber was smoky gray in color and scattered over an area about 200 yards in diameter. When the debris was gathered up, the tinfoil, paper, tape, and sticks made a bundle about three feet long and 7 or 8 inches thick, while the rubber made a bundle about 18 or 20 inches long and about 8 inches thick. In all, he estimated, the entire lot would have weighed maybe five pounds. There was no sign of any metal in the area which might have been used for an engine, and no sign of any propellers of any kind, although at least one paper fin had been glued onto some of the tinfoil. There were no words to be found anywhere on the instrument, although there were letters on some of the parts. Considerable Scotch tape and some tape with flowers printed upon it had been used in the construction. No strings or wires were to be found but there were some eyelets in the paper to indicate that some sort of attachment may have been used.


And the telex to the FBI:

"The disc is hexagonal in shape and was suspended from a ballon [sic] by cable, which ballon [sic] was approximately twenty feet in diameter. Major Curtan further advices that the object found resembles a high altitude weather balloon with a radar reflector, but that telephonic concersation between their office and Wright field had not [UNINTELLIGIBLE] borne out this belief."


These people were not trusted with this technology. The entire MOGUL project was compartmentalised. Be honest, do you know what that term means?

A Rancher told a Sheriff that he had "something" on his land, and it seem rather obvious that this rancher - Brazel - was chasing the $3,000.00 reward - enough to buy an entire HOUSE in Roswell in 1947, and had a crack at getting some reward money. Then the Military sent out some people - namely one Jesse Marcel and Sheridan Cavitt. What was their experience with MOGUL? Zip, nada, nothing. They would not know a MOGUL train if it hit them on the head, so who do they get? The base station Meteorologist, Irving Newton, who puts these things together, as both MOGOL trans andf Weather trains used the sane balloons  and the same equipment from the same store - meteorology.


And what did Irving Newtons say? Well, here read his signed affidavit from a real professional with actual experience pertaining to this very field yourself:


Statement of Irving Newton


  I was asked to provide this statement, by Lt. Col. Joseph V. Rogan who advised me, he was assisting in an investigation at the behest of the Secretary of the Air Force, for the GAO, to look into facts concerning what has become to be known as "The Roswell Incident".
  As I recall it was July 1947, I was then a Warrant Officer with seven years service.  I was the only weather forecaster on duty in the Fort Worth base weather and flight service center.  The base weather covered only the base; the flight service center covered most of the southwest states.  I received a call from some one in General Ramey's office who asked that I go to the General's office.  I informed him that I was the only forecaster on duty and could not leave.  Several minutes later General Ramey Himself called and said "get your ass over here.  If you don't have a car take the first one with a key".
  I was met at the General's office by a Lt. Col. or Col. who told me that some one had found a flying saucer in New Mexico and they had it in the General's Office.  And that a flight had been set up to send it to Wright Patterson AFB, OH., but the General suspicioned that it might be meteorological equipment or something of that nature and wanted it examined by qualified meteorological personnel.
  The Col. and I walked into the General's office where this supposed flying saucer was lying all over the floor.  As soon as I saw it, I giggled and asked if that was the flying saucer.  I was told it was.
  Several people were in the room when I went in, among them, General Ramey, a couple of press people, a Major, I learned to be Major Marcel and some other folks.  Some introduced Major Marcel as the person who found this material.
  I told them that this was a balloon and a RAWIN.  I believed this because I had seen many of these before.  They were normally launched by a special crew and followed by a ground radar unit.  They provided a higher altitude winds aloft.  We did not use them at Fort Worth.  However, I was familiar with them because we used them and their products on various projects in which I was involved.  These were used mostly on special projects and overseas.  The balloon was made out of a rubber type expandable material and when launched was about six to eight feet across.  When the balloons got to altitude they expanded to twenty feet or more.  the target was used for radar reflections and I believe each leg of the target was approximately 48 inches.  It resembled a child's Jack (like a child's ball and jacks set) with a metallic material between the legs.  The legs were made of material appearing to be like balsa wood kite sticks but much tougher.
While I was examining the debris, Major Marcel was picking up pieces of the target sticks and trying to convince me that some notations on the sticks were alien writings.  There were figures on the sticks lavender or pink in color, appeared to be weather faded markings with no rhyme or reason.  He did not convince me these were alien writings.
  I was convinced at the time that this was a balloon with a RAWIN target and remain convinced.
  I remember hearing the General tell someone to cancel the flight, the flight to Wright Patterson.
  While in the office several pictures were taken of Major Marcel, General Ramey, myself and others.
  I was dismissed and went to my office to resume my normal duties.
  During the ensuing years I have been interviewed by many authors, I have been quoted and misquoted.  The facts remain as indicated above.  I was not influenced during the original interview, nor today, to provide anything but what I know to be true, that is, the material I saw in General Ramey's office as the remains of a balloon and a RAWIN target.


Signed:  Irving Newton


Witnessed by:  [Signature illegible]

Subcribed and sworn before me, a person authorized by law to administer oaths, this 21st day of July 1994


Person Administering Oath:  Joseph V. Rogan (signature)

Unit taking statement:  AFOSI Detachment 409


LINK




But hang on a minute, I see below that you are rubbishing the report with the link you stole from WIkipedia, that has not worked for years. The above can be found in said report. You do realise there are two reports?

You have not read the report at all have you? Neither of them? Never even glanced at it have you? But yet you seem to feel you are qualified to evaluate it. Well I think that is quite an Unexplained Mystery, did you manage to absorb it's content? Via Psychic powers perhaps?

But hey, lets not stop at Newton, what about someone who actually saw the debris? Who went to the field? Cavitt, Marcel and Brazel right? But this was not the first time Brazel had seen it was it? He had seen it previously, and his daughter had accompanied them on Horse. So this fellow who found out he might get $3,000.00, enough to buy a house in 1947, did I mention that already?? took his dear daughter who said, and signed an affidavit saying:




Posted Image



A balloon that had burst. I guess Brazel's Daughter did not have dollar signs in her eyes, and told us exactly what she saw. Not that Brazel's description offers any more than a balloon either does it? Did you know that is why the UFO nuts avoid her like a plague, and attack her younger brother, who might play the media's game, but never sighted the debris like Bessie did.

And I will tell you another thing the UFOlogists will not. For all Jesse Jnr. "solid testimony" for a site he did not attend, he and his father argued about the debris till the day Jesse senior died. One says the "Beams" were square, the other says no way, they were I Beams. Check bit their testimonies if you do not believe me. Hell they could not aven agree on the shape of one of the most discussed items, yet this never ever comes up! And this is where you are getting your "sold" confirmation from? Laughable to say the very least.


Great detective work there Sherlock, any day now can we expect yo to uncover the secret to FTL LOL.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 19 April 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

The ensuing panic was so great that Welles was brought to court over what was a perceived publicity stunt.  Do you really believe the world to have been a different place a mere 9 years later?  This was a highly controversial topic back then as it still is now.  Then it is dropped and not mentioned again because people didn't question government.  It is not until later when Jesse Marcel Sr. brings it back up that the Roswell issue is a hot topic once again.  His story never waivered in all the years he told it, which again is very telling.  This is a military man who was a part of the same group that controlled the nuclear bomb.  Yet, skeptics will claim he could not tell the difference between a downed weather balloon and a possible ET craft?  Another inconsistency.

No it was not, as Rafterman pointed out, this is merely another fabrication. It was barely mentioned more than half a dozen times in the decades before 1979 when one mr Friedman got his cashhooks into this tall tale, and saw he could make something of it. Viola - Aliens were born.

This is how it was reported "in the day" - as a balloon. What - balloon you say, didn't that come form the USAF reports? - No, MOGUL did.

Posted Image


You also seem to have conveniently forgotten this headline:


Posted Image


The "inconsistency" as you put it, it glaringly leading you the the mostly likely answer, which I placed in your lap days ago. Lost Shamans hypothesis. I asked you to falsify it, but you ignored that request, I suspect you fear it, as it is indeed very hard to falsify. I know, I tried.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 19 April 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

Last, but certainly not least is the government returning in 1994 issuing a "case closed" explanation in which an already explained event was changed yet again with another cover story;

http://www.af.mil/information/roswell/

Ahhh, dead link.

that has been dead on Wiki for years. Sheesh. If you want a copy of either report, or the GAO, PM me and I will try to get a copy across to you. I will offer to explain any part of it you find a little to hard to comprehend as well if you like.


It is very ordinary of you to claim the reports are bogus, when you have not got the slightest clue what is in them. You did what you say you despise - you knee jerk b=debunked them without any research whatsoever. Your replies indicate that you are lazy. but this really takes the cake IMHO.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 19 April 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

Those who have read this summary to the event will see that the government yet again adds another cover-up story element.  Why would the government have anything to add if not to hush those questioning the official story?  The military NEVER adds anything after giving an official answer to anything.  But they suspiciously changed their story with this follow up to their initial cover story?  

I have read them all, and know them quite well. What is this cover up element? Not that amazing stuff up you made the other day about dummies that I have already corrected for you by putting the relevant page from the report right under your nose so you can see for yourself that your claims was an outright fabrication, and illustrated that you have not read the report you seem to have found all these holes in? Remote view the report did we? You link does not even work to the report you say not to trust! That is so lame that it is hilarious!!


View Postconspiracy buff, on 19 April 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

These are just a few examples not even including the numerous eyewitness accounts that all seem to independently verify each other.  It all comes down to one thing; Who has more to gain by lying?  The United States Government?  Or these quality eyewitnesses[not including the few hoaxes]?  Philip Corso takes it one step further in "The Day After Roswell" and explains that indeed a UFO did crash at Roswell in 1947 and that the government covered it up for their own agenda and purposes.  They back engineered the technology and implemented it into our own technology including various fields more notably in our US aircrafts and reconnaissance.  Is this coincidental?  Why would guards be ordered to shoot if there was a simple downed weather balloon?

All seem to now? Where did that iron clad confidence go? And what do the reports that "seem" to verify each other say? That Aliens crossed space in a spaceship the size of a Volkswagen Beetle!! Yeah right mate!! And again, check them yourself, it is about time you looked something up instead of regurgutating that which you heard in the media like a decade ago. You need more space than that to get a craft across space. Not to mention how many of these people who claim to have seen it on the ground call it an egg? Pretty much all of them right? What did te Wilmots see the night before?A Saucer. How is that lining up stories? Or the aforementioned basic disagreement between two apparent direct witnesses?

Corso is full of it, every item in our inventory has a long history of R&D associated with it. All Corso did was write a book about technologies that were emerging in the time frame and took credit for it. Your buddy Stanton Friedman says Corso is not to be trusted, yet you say he is, and to listen to Stanton Friedman. Your own advice contradicts itself. And you claim to be on the right track? Yeah, sure mate. You ar on the right track to help the media keep fleecing this for decades to come, and to ensure the confusion is total, but I do not see you accomplishing much else.

What have they to gain by lying? Millions! You know the Museum Haut and Dennis kicked off?

The museum has occupied an old downtown movie theater since 1997, but plans a new $14 million building several blocks north, across the street from Roswell's saucer-shaped McDonald's, designed to look like a star map popping out of an abstract file drawer. For now it's just a concept drawing and another exhibit in the museum. We hope it gets built before Roswell's next saucer crash.

LINK

You know who is losing money here? The people of the United States. Their taxes pay for the daily operation of the USAF, and because of the crap people like this very author are spreading, the USAF still get s daily calls with the stipud old questions of "Did Aleinz land in Roswell New Mwexico?" Yeah, stii, today, in this day and age. And guess what, the US citizens are paying for this. They have a member employed full time just to answer that same question over and again. The Government, the USAF, and the US citizens are the ones losing, the UFOlogists are the ones gaining. It's also the time

View Postconspiracy buff, on 19 April 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

I'm sure there will be plenty of quotes on this one, which I welcome.  There are a lot of holes in the official explanations and I'd like to see someone attempt to explain all of that away.

Explained away - there you go, done and dusted. Any more?

It would seem the holes are the ones in the ever changing conspiracy theory that people have grown up with, and that which Stanton Friedman convoluted with his own addition of aliens to the story. Anyone who has spent 5 minutes researching Roswell knows the Aliens are Friedman's personal contribution. To attempt to make them real 40 years after the fact is a joke. And then to keep pushing that for another 20 years is somewhat embarrassing to the species as a whole.

The claim is complete BS, and this is why Mr Bragalia is so terrible at writing up Roswell. I thought it side splitting when he spent weeks banging on about memory metal  and when Badeskov showed his silly claims to be incorrect, and not at all factual, what was his next article? The Official Record of Memory Metal is a Lie. Hell, on could write his articles for him because they are so damn predictable.
I call this claim, this thread, this title an outright lie, and wish to see more than a regurgitated rehashed claim that states nothing, goes nowhere, and is obviously flawed. One thing everyone here can bet on:

Mt Bragalia, like the gutless weaklings who continually make this sordid claim from behind screens would not have the guts to walk up to a marine and make tis accusation. But I would pay good money to see such happen. Heaps of claims to make, until one has to put their money where their mouth is. You ought to be ashamed of yourself, and embarrassed of yourself, that you would entertain such a disgusting thought form the men, women, brothers, sister, Fathers and Mother's, Uncles and Aunts who would lay their life on the line for your pathetic butt, who spouts this sort of garbage against them. And Mr Bragalia ought to hang his head in shame for being so gross as to make such a vile accusation in public.

All you have illustrated here is that like so many other, you do not wish to research the topic, but wish to  listen to the sensationalised version the media spews out for you. But your posting does indicate that you are lazy, and want everything given to you, and if it does not fit into your world view, you will ignore information. And that ladies and gents is how we get The Roswell Incident. Brought to you by the credulous, the desperate, and the faithful.


No holes in the official explain, but plenty on the many version the woo woo crowd put up. You said you would welcome such, and I am more the first. Lts see if this time you have the gumption to answer the critical thinkers, and stand behind your claims of confident bravado.

Roswell is a prime example of what is wrong with UFOlogy today.

Posted Image



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

#78    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:12 AM

View Postspartan max2, on 19 April 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

I havent been able to make up my mind on aliens yet. :unsure2:

??

It's not rocket science


ohh wait it is isn't it. LOL, silly me.


Posted Image

Edited by psyche101, 22 April 2013 - 01:13 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. - Dr Who

#79    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,695 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 22 April 2013 - 01:15 AM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 21 April 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

Was that your Toy last month in the News Bades ? Laser guns to Drone !

D... it, sshhh.... :P

No, in seriousness, it was not. But we do laser range finding and mission critical coms/control for air and space borne platforms. And some of our lasers, well, you don't want to inadvertently put any of your digits in the light path ;)

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited by badeskov, 22 April 2013 - 01:16 AM.

"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.

#80    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:16 AM

View PostJ. K., on 19 April 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

The Day After Roswell by Philip Corso was an interesting book to read.

Fiction always is. It's how the ETH stays alive. I always thought the title was accurate in a sense though, Corso is certainly a day behind everyone else regarding that tall tale.

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

#81    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:17 AM

View PostGatofeo, on 19 April 2013 - 06:48 PM, said:

I was a U.S. Air Force Security Policeman (Law Enforcement Specialist) at Lowry Air Force Base, in Denver, Colo., 1975-76.
We had a classified building there that we guarded. We sat at a desk inside the door and checked identification. At times, for ramped-up security, we controlled entry at its surrounding fence line and carried M16 rifles and Remington 870 shotguns.
Inside the building, beyond the desk we sat at, was a long hallway of green linoleum that eventually turned to the left, beyond our sight.
Within our sight, at the end of the hallway before it turned left, the tiles became red.
We were instructed that if anyone -- ANYONE -- ignored our identification check and reached those red tiles about 30 feet away, despite our shouts to them to return, we were authorized to shoot them. In the back, if necessary. No one with an unchecked identification was allowed to enter the red tiles. And those who worked there knew it; they ensured their I.D. got checked.
Shooting would have been done with the Smith & Wesson Model 15 .38 Special revolvers were carried on our belt. We didn't keep a rifle or shotgun at the desk.

And what was in the building? We guarded it for more than a year before we learned that it was a receiving station for surveillance satellites. Apparently, to emphasize its importance, we were given a quick tour beyond the end of the hallway.
Lowry Air Force base closed down in the 1990s, so I have no reservations about revealing the building.

I never ONCE heard the order, "Shoot to kill." I suspect that order is a fabrication, perhaps dating from old Hollywood movies.
Anyone in the service I've ever spoken with has merely said they were authorized to shoot an intruder. That's it, "authorized to shoot."
On some military installations, particularly those holding nuclear weapons, signs on the fenceline will say, "USE OF DEADLY FORCE AUTHORIZED."
And that's it ... no "Shoot to Kill" or some such thing. Merely the fact that, if you enter beyond this fenceline, you may be fired upon.
BUT ... and this is a but bigger than a Seattle prom queen's ... deadly force is only authorized to stop an equally deadly act, or an act that will result in permanent debilitating injury.
Trying to enter a nuclear storage facility certainly qualifies as a potentially deadly or debilitating act, and the use of deadly force would be authorized.
Climbing over the fenceline and standing there with a grin wouldn't qualify.
HOWEVER, never discount the fact that the responding mllitary policeman does not know your intent. And he does not know if you have a pistol in your pocket.
If he pulls up and you make a quick movement that would lead any reasonably thinking person that you're going for a weapon, he would be authorized to shoot.
Whether the military policeman kills the suspect is immaterial. He shoots to stop. Forget what you see in the movies about shooting someone in the leg or shoulder. You shoot for center mass, the biggest target available: the chest and abdomen.

I really doubt this soldier's assertion that he was told to "shoot to kill." I served under some old sergeants, who joined the Air Force in the late 1940s and early 1950s (the Air Force was created in 1947), and they never once said such a thing. We were told, "Shoot for center mass" or "shoot to stop." The meaning was clear: shoot, and keep shooting, until the threat no longer exists. Generally, this means that the person is down on the ground, not moving, or indicates surrender.
When I was in the Air Force, if you shot someone you were almost immediately transferred far away from that installation. This was done to avoid retaliation by friends or family members of the person shot. It also isolated you away from other service members that might be involved, so you couldn't collude on an alibi.
I don't know if this practice still exists.

"Shoot to kill?" I don't believe it.

What was in the building at Roswell? It was the beginning of the Cold War, tensions were high, and I understand that the weather balloon carried instruments to "listen" for an atomic blast in the Soviet Union. This would have been a highly classified project.
Guards can employ deadly force to protect high-level national secrecy, in some instances. I suspect that secrecy on this project was very high, and certainly would have qualified.


:nw: :nw: :nw: :nw: :nw: :nw: :nw:


Thank you very much for sharing your real world experience. This sounds more like the military we know and love :D

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

#82    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:21 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 19 April 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

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


:yes:

Posted Image

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

#83    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:24 AM

View PostAndromedan Starseed 333, on 20 April 2013 - 08:29 PM, said:

so much for a weather balloon skeptics and non believers.never believe a "official story" especially from the governments and the military and the mainstream media that is being controlled and manipulated people and this goes to all humanity.i hope i see a UFOs and E.Ts in my lifetime soon and the next if decide to come here to earth lol

if i was just nothing like they claim they wouldn't give such a order


Why do I suspect that you have no clue what the official story actually is? Would I be right in betting you too have not read either USAF report, yet feel qualified to discuss, and summarily dismiss them? And that is what, based on hearsay from woo woo sites? This is what convinces you?

But yer, the ebil gummit did it right. :rolleyes:

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

#84    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:26 AM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 19 April 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

Then that leaves it up to Cox's personal interpretation right? He may not have been guarding anything to do with the Roswell Crash. From the description of what Cox was guarding it doesn't exactly fit any other descriptions we have about the debris recovered from Roswell, unless there is something I'm missing?



Quote of the thread my man :nw:

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

#85    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 7,148 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right behind you!

  • I know someday
    you'll have a beautiful life
    I know you'll be a sun
    In somebody else's sky
    But why can't it be mine? -Pearl Jam

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:26 AM

Guns blazing huh psyche? :lol: :tu:

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#86    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:34 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 20 April 2013 - 11:34 PM, said:

You should remember, Rafterman, that Stanton Friedman is a scientist who has personally investigated the UFO phenomenon for 39 years, (which I'm sure you haven't), and during that time he has studied an awful amount of government documents and interviewed a great many people regarding the Roswell incident. By calling him a 'UFO nut' you are similarly labelling everyone else with the belief that there IS something to the subject. You seem to forget that Stanton isn't the only 'UFO nut' around. What about the pilots both civilian and military who have seen with their own eyes and reported very real and mysterious objects close to them in the sky making impossible manoeuvres, (for earthly aircraft that is)? What about the radar operators both air and ground control who have reported seeing on their screens objects, (obviously structured), moving at incredible speeds and making right angled turns without any deceleration? Not to mention the many police officers who have reported some incredible aerial events. Are all of those people 'UFO nuts' as well? You seem to be a typical example of the mindset, 'don't bother me with the facts my mind is made up'! So why couldn't it have been a flying saucer that crashed, (two of them actually). I'm sure that, (like ours), their technology isn't perfect either. I'm think Mr. Friedman would be more than willing to debate you on the subject which I think you would decline! Do some serious research and you might have a change of mind.

You might find the following of some interest:


SCIENTIST CHALLENGES AIR FORCE REGARDING UFOs.


Nov. 13, 1997.
By Stanton T. Friedman.


"Frankly I am sick and tired of the US Air Force lying to the public, the press, and members of Congress about UFOs," said nuclear physicist Stanton T. Friedman at a public lecture “Flying Saucers ARE Real” in Albuquerque. “I have had a serious interest in UFOs for 39 years, lectured in a dozen countries, and visited seventeen document archives,” he continued. “For 50 years there has been massive misrepresentation about UFOs in general, and in recent years the Roswell Incident in particular. The Air Force has come up with four different answers for Roswell:

*SNIP*

"USAF officers McAndrew and Weaver, do you have the courage of your convictions? Name the date and place. Perhaps Larry King or Walter Cronkite or Ted Koppel would be willing to act as moderator.”

Stanton Friedman.






You know the guy Corso the credulous are banging on about here? This is what Stan has to say about him. These guys cannot even agree on a crashed saucer? Each one of the has a different copy of "The Truth"


LINK - Friedman on Croso.


Seriously, ti's a three ring circus, Friedman, Rudiak and one other a-hol.






Posted Image

Edited by psyche101, 22 April 2013 - 01:34 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. - Dr Who

#87    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:38 AM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 22 April 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

Guns blazing huh psyche? :lol: :tu:






Posted Image



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

#88    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 7,148 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right behind you!

  • I know someday
    you'll have a beautiful life
    I know you'll be a sun
    In somebody else's sky
    But why can't it be mine? -Pearl Jam

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:40 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 22 April 2013 - 01:38 AM, said:

Posted Image



HAHAHA that's awesome! :lol:

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#89    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:45 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 21 April 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

I fully accept that the UFO world is full of disreputable people who are just out to make some easy money. The saying is that 95% of all UFO sightings can be easily explained. I would go further and say that 95%, if not a lot more, of people in the UFO fraternity are charlatans and frauds. However, I honestly believe that Stanton Friedman is one of the genuine ones. :passifier:


Considering this crash took place on a ranch, and that according to all reports there were many civillians on site before the military arrived, can you explain to me how not one persion picked up and pocket a piece of flying saucer? Honestly  could you contain yourself? No way I could. Yet not a single stich of the alleged saucer exists to this day, yet according to MRs. Brazel, Mac's wife, the man who made the initial call, she thought it was useless rubbish and swept it out the back door. Rumour has it the homestead where the family lived put down a concrete slab shortly afterwards, and  if Aliens parts really did ever exist, there are most likely still "bits" of what many called a saucer or disk under that very slab protected by concrete to this day.

Everyone knows this tale, it just does not seem important enough to break up an old concrete slab for. Pretty valuable huh.

View PostSlave2Fate, on 22 April 2013 - 01:40 AM, said:

HAHAHA that's awesome! :lol:

LOL on fire this morning. ANZAC day this week, looking forward to it :D

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

#90    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,615 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 April 2013 - 01:46 AM

View PostAsteroidX, on 21 April 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

The reasons I can think of would be in the way they use to interstellar space travel (which is an unknown variable).

We have probes in Interstellar space. It's not a complete mystery.

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




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users