Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
archernyc

Roswell: Two Crashes, Not One

322 posts in this topic

Does that not remove the situation from Roswell itself though? 150-60 miles is a long way to bounce.

Would I be assuming correctly that you think the real incident was not at Roswell at all?

Hard for me to say since I never saw those Top Secret records, and wouldn't even have dared to ask. Hell, I wouldn't even have known WHO to ask. LOL. They just mentioned two 1947 incidents in New Mexico, and I'm sure neither of them was at Roswell. At some point, I believe Marcel did mention a "surveyor" in another town who reported a UFO crash, and some people think that referred to Barney Barnett, since part of his job was surveying.

I've never seen any indication that Barnett even knew who Marcel was or that there was a reported crash at Roswell. Of course, he's been dead since 1967 so no one outside the military, as well as his friends, wife and neighbors, ever heard his UFO story at all. I don't think Marcel ever had anything to do with that one, if it really happened at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with human error, but not technical. Even we have cars now that park themselves. I can see that it would only take a decent RADAR and a smart computer of put in some very good anti collision systems, if technologically advanced, breaking down is a ludicrous concept. You cannot take the risk that you will break down in space, that is mission over.

And our atmosphere holds all elements in it that will support life as we know it, I cannot understand an interstellar visitor having no knowledge of habitable planets. I just do not see aliens arriving with Class M Planets for Dummies in their little green hands.

How come there are still organisations like the AA, AAA, RAC, and whatever the Australian one is? AAA as well? that do big business assisting broken down drivers? Cars still seem to break down, and surely people wouldn't be complacent enough as to believe that computers and technoligical devices are so perfect as to never go wrong. Surely experience offers all the refutation you need for that.

Besides, have you never heard of flights being delayed owing to technical difficulties? Even if they may not crash so often, technical difficulties still occur.

is it really so presposterous that an electronic gadget might go on the blink? Well, you have more faith in technology than I do.

Anyway, I'm talking more about simple error, and that could come from all sorts of things, like inputting the wrong data for instance. That's happened to space probes, hasn't it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true in the slightest. I think it is impossible for you to post my big sisters middle name on this thread within 3 minutes of me posting this. Prove me wrong.

I think it is impossible for a man to run 1,000 kilometers unaided in under 1 second. Prove me wrong. I think man cannot walk naked on the sun, prove me wrong.

They must pay well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a letter today from the National Archives about the Record Group for the Research and Development Board, 1946-53. All of these have been declassified except for two boxes, and I am going to request those. I did not mention anything like "Roswell" or "UFOs" when I made this request, nor will I when I submit a declassification request. I'll let you know if I find anything interesting in those, but my advice is never to submit any declassification request that refers to UFOs, but just make it sound like something more routine.

We shall see if anything is there at the National Archives.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be off for a while as I start looking into this particular Record Group. I do not know when I will be back. We shall see what's in it. Goodbye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come there are still organisations like the AA, AAA, RAC, and whatever the Australian one is? AAA as well? that do big business assisting broken down drivers? Cars still seem to break down, and surely people wouldn't be complacent enough as to believe that computers and technoligical devices are so perfect as to never go wrong. Surely experience offers all the refutation you need for that.

Besides, have you never heard of flights being delayed owing to technical difficulties? Even if they may not crash so often, technical difficulties still occur.

is it really so presposterous that an electronic gadget might go on the blink? Well, you have more faith in technology than I do.

Anyway, I'm talking more about simple error, and that could come from all sorts of things, like inputting the wrong data for instance. That's happened to space probes, hasn't it.

Agreed. The more advanced a vehicle is the more it seems to be prone to mechanical failure with all the electronics. The more parts a machine has, the more repairs are needed. I know this from equipment that I work with. The equipment with lesser electronics doesn't break down that much. They put sensors in trucks to detect problems but the sensors seem to always go bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come there are still organisations like the AA, AAA, RAC, and whatever the Australian one is? AAA as well? that do big business assisting broken down drivers? Cars still seem to break down, and surely people wouldn't be complacent enough as to believe that computers and technoligical devices are so perfect as to never go wrong. Surely experience offers all the refutation you need for that.

Besides, have you never heard of flights being delayed owing to technical difficulties? Even if they may not crash so often, technical difficulties still occur.

is it really so presposterous that an electronic gadget might go on the blink? Well, you have more faith in technology than I do.

Anyway, I'm talking more about simple error, and that could come from all sorts of things, like inputting the wrong data for instance. That's happened to space probes, hasn't it.

Ok. That said... I think you might be over simplifying and ignoring some very pertinent details that must apply to an E.T. civilization visiting Earth, that don't apply to "our" technology. They have to be much more advanced and experienced at Space travel than "we" can even dream of just to get here! You can't equate that kind of technology that "we" can only dream of to motor vehicles "we" have today like you want to do here. If they've traveled interstellar distances

Then there is also the fact that it's much more economical to build car parts that eventually wear out as opposed to building them to out last the life of the vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. That said... I think you might be over simplifying and ignoring some very pertinent details that must apply to an E.T. civilization visiting Earth, that don't apply to "our" technology. They have to be much more advanced and experienced at Space travel than "we" can even dream of just to get here! You can't equate that kind of technology that "we" can only dream of to motor vehicles "we" have today like you want to do here. If they've traveled interstellar distances

Then there is also the fact that it's much more economical to build car parts that eventually wear out as opposed to building them to out last the life of the vehicle.

But my argument is that they wouldn't use the same vehicles that zip at faster than the speed of light through the unimaginable distances of space to then explore the planet once they'd got there. it's only sensible to use smaller craft, probably drones, to do that. And those wouldn't be immune to the hazards that would naturally come with exploring a new environment.

* It's interesting how similar this line of argument is, incidentally, to the one that looks at ETs as infallible gods and argues that anything we can do is irredeemably feeble besides their omnipotence, I can't help thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe any entity from any other planet has it's faults also regardless of it's technology.

If one believes in God, Then why did God create such imperfect entities such as us?

Just making a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ITs just like we do Send out the Drones ! Hum ? THat would make a catchy Song !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people never seem to understand that when talking with advanced technology, you're going to have to (gasps in horror) speculate about things that the Hard Nosed might dismiss as the mere stuff of fantasy, do they? If we're talking about technology far in advance of ours, then obviously we're going to have to consider things that we might think are just the stuff of Fantasy. We would never make any progress at all if we just stuck in the mud of insisting that only what we know to be possible is possible.

Correction - speculations about advanced technologies.

Not every thing we are imagining about ET technology would be physically possible, not even by ETs who are even few billions of years more advanced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But my argument is that they wouldn't use the same vehicles that zip at faster than the speed of light through the unimaginable distances of space to then explore the planet once they'd got there. it's only sensible to use smaller craft, probably drones, to do that. And those wouldn't be immune to the hazards that would naturally come with exploring a new environment.

[...]

How come, then, not a single alien did stuck into the wall while squeezing/walking through the wall (as claimed by alleged abductees)?

Now, smaller crafts/drones would be required to be as much resilient (IMHO, simple logic, different planets with very different environments) as their motherships, unless ETs can materialize things from thin air/vacuum. What would they do if they would run out of the smaller crafts/drones? Build new ones on the motherships? What about resources? Replenish from the planets they so frequently crash on? And if their geological gadgets are that much fragile as their saucers... They are screwed...

Damn, lets go to Venus , there must plenty of ET technology to scavenge...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once when we think something is impossible. It turns out it can be possible. History has shown that.

OK, make wings using wax and feathers and fly around Empire State Building's top, say, six times. Thats easy. Will you try?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe any entity from any other planet has it's faults also regardless of it's technology.

If one believes in God, Then why did God create such imperfect entities such as us?

Just making a point.

Why alienz are so perfect penetrating walls. and so dumb crashing their precious saucers all over the Earth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, make wings using wax and feathers and fly around Empire State Building's top, say, six times. Thats easy. Will you try?

It was once thought to be impossible to go to the moon because there is no oxygen to breath, but we brought our own.

But then maybe you're one of those conspiracy theorist that think the apollo missions were faked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why alienz are so perfect penetrating walls. and so dumb crashing their precious saucers all over the Earth?

Why do some people with an IQ of 130 or better let their homes deteriorate instead of hiring a contractor

to keep their house in good shape?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do some people with an IQ of 130 or better let their homes deteriorate instead of hiring a contractor

to keep their house in good shape?

Good question. So, why? Alienz are (should be) better than that...

But, and there is crucial thing: there are some psychological effects that keep your mentioned folks in the state they are now, period. Thats the area of specialists, not the morons like my, or you.

Edited by bmk1245

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question. So, why? Alienz are (should be) better than that...

But, and there is crucial thing: there are some psychological effects that keep your mentioned folks in the state they are now, period. Thats the area of specialists, not the morons like my, or you.

Maybe the aliens had a psychological disorder and crashed if they crashed. Just because one has superior intellegence

doesn't make them invulnerable. Even Superman had Kryptonite. :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But my argument is that they wouldn't use the same vehicles that zip at faster than the speed of light through the unimaginable distances of space to then explore the planet once they'd got there. it's only sensible to use smaller craft, probably drones, to do that. And those wouldn't be immune to the hazards that would naturally come with exploring a new environment.

Why wouldn't they be immune to Earth's "hazzards"? Earth is just a simple normal little Planet, if anything Earth is going to be one of the 'safest' Planets an Alien could visit compare to what we know of other Planets. These Aliens would certainly have to have evoled on a very similar Planet with an Atmosphere, so what exactly would they find so 'new' and' hazardous' about flying around in Earth's Atmosphere?

* It's interesting how similar this line of argument is, incidentally, to the one that looks at ETs as infallible gods and argues that anything we can do is irredeemably feeble besides their omnipotence, I can't help thinking.

Why do you always seem to lament that which is painfully obvious? Clearly if "they" can get here from another star system their technology has to be so much more advanced than 'ours' to the point that there would be no comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess to understand an alien is to think like an alien instead of trying to look at it from a human perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found out you had a big sister and she has a middle name and you made that Possible. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only read through a few of the posts so I apologize in advance if I missed something, but I also read there were two crashes, in a book that was very objective, imo. Unfortunately I don't remember the name of the book but I thought it was interesting that at the end he left the conclusion open and said that by now so much time has passed and the waters have been muddied so much that, as with the truth with so many other things, perhaps we'll never know the whole truth.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with human error, but not technical. Even we have cars now that park themselves. I can see that it would only take a decent RADAR and a smart computer of put in some very good anti collision systems, if technologically advanced, breaking down is a ludicrous concept. You cannot take the risk that you will break down in space, that is mission over.

First off, I got out of the hospital Thursday where I'd been treated for a respiratory infection. So I'm home, still sick as [phrase deleted that would have caused my Most Beloved DotNM to blush most daintily] but participation will be spotty at best until I can sit up for longer than 5 minutes without fatigue/dizziness. And even then when Meli isn't around to do the Big Stick thing to take care of Papa. This is kind of like the Big Stick thing daughters use on daddies to keep them in line.

Anyway, I'm going to answer this as an engineer. Hopefully it'll help a little.

The best an engineer can do is allow for any imaginable failure modes. It's the unimaginable ones that are the problem. But they're part of the risk of going into space, an environment hostile to any being requiring anything vaguely resembling Earth-style conditions. We know that. Any space faring species does. We - and they - also have a set of what's considered "acceptable risks" that go with space exploration. One such that comes up a lot is radiation. It's there and can be fatal to both beings and equipment but it's also part of being in space or at least this close to a star. We do what we can about it but it won't go away just because it's an inconvenience. Look at the astronauts sitting on top of a launch vehicle.

The more advanced space faring species have a definite lead on us in understanding and managing a wider range of imaginable failure modes but they also are subject to unimaginable ones. (Well, unless they're gods in which case they don't need spacecraft.) They learn from experience just like we do - and I would hope a darn sight better in some things - and have a far, far broader knowledge/experience base than we do but they are not gods. They are fallible. Neither they nor their machines are perfect. They know just like we do that "fail safe" isn't and that the universal truism of "Nature favors the hidden flaw" holds sway. And they know that they both have to be taken into consideration although in the latter case they have no idea what they're designing to avoid. That just makes it a little more interesting.

There's more but my brain is shutting down again. As it is it took me 6-7 tries to get this much done. Maybe later when I'm feeling better?

I just do not see aliens arriving with Class M Planets for Dummies in their little green hands.

You won't. It'll be imbedded subcranially.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what about important missions. Wouldn't more experienced be selected for that (as younglings I see less experienced pilots, not the age)?

I answered that. Which is more important, flying a scout or commanding the ship that positions the scouts so they can do their thing?

The reason chain of command and rank structure are maintained is because they work and work quite well. Everyone is in a position to provide the maximum benefit to the overall mission/ship/service/whatever. This assumes manned scouts/probes. I'm not completely convinced that is the case in 100% of the reported aliens/bodies situations. From a practicality standpoint there's no reason to buy into the whole idea of manned probes/scouts for 99% of their operations since unmanned ones can achieve the same goals at far less per unit expense.

If only we would had all data required, 100% would had been explained.

Errr ... ummm ... that's true of all of the unknowns.

SciFi ngly speaking you have something here.

I did say it was a hypothetical case. Speculation is not outside the limits to discussion here. In fact, this whole area - ET & UFOs - is ripe for speculation since in a great number of cases, that's all there is left.

It wasn't a riddle, just an example of fragility of our perception.

Okay. I'm still terrible at riddles but at least now I know there wasn't one buried in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can always hope that they land during a Super Bowl Half time event ! THen we can Show then the best we have to offer from our world.

See ? This is why we have not been contacted. THey really do have access to our Internet and Radio,ect T.V waves. THis is a sad night indeed.

THe Horror ! THe Horror of it all !

Im off to pop myself into the oven ! :alien::no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.