Roswell guard ordered to 'shoot to kill'

[Antilles]

Maybe the shoot to kill order was given for whatever was in the hangar... Not to stop anyone going in , but to stop whatever was in there from getting out.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Antilles

[S2F]

Maybe the shoot to kill order was given for whatever was in the hangar... Not to stop anyone going in , but to stop whatever was in there from getting out.

Perhaps except for one little bit:

Major Easley had commanded Calvin in absolute terms to “shoot and kill anyone who tried to enter the hangar that was not authorized to do so.”

*From OP article.

[Technocrat]

I say Get-er-Done ! Sir Friedman should keep to the Book deals ! ITs makes more cent`s And besides,We all Know that The Little Green men are all Out In Las Vegas ! running the Gameing Halls !

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.

[Rafterman]

​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.

Saying Stanton Friedman is a "scientist" is a bit of a stretch. A more accurate description is that he was a bench physicist with only a masters degree who worked for GE for 14 years. For almost 40 years now, he's been a "UFO expert" and author. So to claim he is a "scientist" or even a nuclear physicist is laughable.

The guy is a kook and a charlatan who does questionable investigations and manufacture stories in order to sell books.

And yes, I would gladly debate him on the subject of UFOs and I know I would win because, well, there are no UFOs.

[badeskov]

​You should remember, Rafterman, that Stanton Friedman is a scientist

Mr. Friedman is not a scientist. He allegedly worked as one a long time ago, although I have been unable to unearth any scientific publications attributed to him during that time. Being a scientist is a job description, not a lifelong title one is given.

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.

If we go by his standards of research from the UFO field, I would never hire him as part of my research group - he would probably be booted out rather quickly based on sloppy work.

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.

I agree with Rafterman in labeling Mr. Friedman a UFO nut and the reason is how Mr. Friedman propagates his beliefs. He is preaching and holds no qualms in presenting information out of context or to leave out crucial information to make his claims look valid. He is, at best, a very sloppy and exceptionally inept researcher. At worst....

He has a belief and he has hinged all his credibility at trying to prove his assertions. Unfortunately things started falling apart between his hands and instead of moving on, he got obsessed with it. Not the most objective person, I daresay.

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 them? They are still only stories without anything tangible to really discuss.

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?

Again, what about them? As above, many, many cases have been discussed here and we have yet to see any form of tangible evidence. And how are they "obviously structured"? Radar is not infallible, nor are the people behind the radar screens. And we know that some atmospheric phenomena can exhibit exactly the behavior as you describe.

Not to mention the many police officers who have reported some incredible aerial events. Are all of those people 'UFO nuts' as well?

Of course not, nor was Rafterman alluding to that as far as I could tell. They generally don't run around propagating false information and make up things, whereas Mr. Friedman is in my opinion.

You seem to be a typical example of the mindset, 'don't bother me with the facts my mind is made up'!

I can't speak for Rafterman, but that is not my impression of him. And that said, the facts have been discussed here numerous times and only by the stretch of Mr. Friedman's imagination do they even remotely support the crashed ET hypothesis.

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.

One would think that a race capable of crossing interstellar space would have some very reliable technologies, however, the possibility naturally exists.

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.

I have a feeling that Mr. Friedman would be rather reluctant to debate this subject with people actually well versed in it.

You might find the following of some interest:

<snip>

Not really, but thanks for posting.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited April 21, 2013 by badeskov

[AsteroidX]

I'm still waiting for the soldiers to come forward that actually retrieved the items and gleaned both areas of the debris

Do you think those people would still be alive ?

One would think that a race capable of crossing interstellar space would have some very reliable technologies, however, the possible naturally exists.

Youtr talking about many variables and unknowns in how an alien species might coexist. Just because your flying the ship doesnt mean you can rebuild all the other components from the ground up on a technologically inferior world. And certainly all tech regardless of who made it is prone to have accidents or failures. I agree

Edited April 21, 2013 by AsteroidX

[badeskov]

Hi AsteroidX,

I am not really sure what you mean by this:

Youtr talking about many variables and unknowns in how an alien species might coexist. Just because your flying the ship doesnt mean you can rebuild all the other components from the ground up on a technologically inferior world. And certainly all tech regardless of who made it is prone to have accidents or failures. I agree

I was not thinking of co-existing or similar, but simply wondering about how likely it is that a space-faring race capable of crossing interstellar space would come to Earth and crash.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[AsteroidX]

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

2. If you hit one satellite out there it could cause a failure that causes a crash (I believe we had a couple up in the year of Roswell) .....Just as a couple examples of HOW its possible.

[badeskov]

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

2. If you hit one satellite out there it could cause a failure that causes a crash (I believe we had a couple up in the year of Roswell) .....Just as a couple examples of HOW its possible.

I would think that a space-faring race capable of circumventing the dangers of space would be able to navigate around our satellites. Honestly, I personally do not see the crash due to mechanical failure or the like as very plausible. But that just my opinion.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[S2F]

I would think that a space-faring race capable of circumventing the dangers of space would be able to navigate around our satellites. Honestly, I personally do not see the crash due to mechanical failure or the like as very plausible. But that just my opinion.

Cheers,

Badeskov

It would be much like a professional race car driver having an accident driving to the corner market after winning an entire racing season unscathed. It could happen but it's unlikely.

[AsteroidX]

I would think that a space-faring race capable of circumventing the dangers of space would be able to navigate around our satellites. Honestly, I personally do not see the crash due to mechanical failure or the like as very plausible. But that just my opinion.

I dont disagree but we know to little on how there travels would take place. So really theres no data to even start a hypothesis on how. I seen it like this travel from point A to B very fast. Now you would know satellite A would be at your B when you arrived. And at minimum you have a collision. We already know you cannot travel across the stars at less then light travel unless you have 100's to 1000's of years to waste each one way trip.

[Technocrat]

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

2. If you hit one satellite out there it could cause a failure that causes a crash (I believe we had a couple up in the year of Roswell) .....Just as a couple examples of HOW its possible.

The first artificial satellite was 'Sputnik 1' and it was launched by the Russians on 4th October 1957, a good ten years after Roswell.

[Technocrat]

We already know you cannot travel across the stars at less then light travel unless you have 100's to 1000's of years to waste each one way trip.

We already know from Einstein's laws that it isn't possible to travel at or even near the speed of light. According to Einstein the mass of an object increases as it accelerates and at the speed of light its mass would fill the entire universe. So light speed travel in the normal sense will only ever be science fiction. It has, however, been proposed that if it were possible to compress the gravitational field in front of a craft and to expand the gravitational field behind it it would then be possible to travel through the 'fabric of space' at even faster than light speed and the time on board the craft would remain in sync with the earth. I think that will be the future of interstellar travel and is most likely the means that is used by the ETs, if they really exist!

[badeskov]

I dont disagree but we know to little on how there travels would take place. So really theres no data to even start a hypothesis on how.

Indeed we one data point to work from and that data point is us. But given the dangers and challenges facing any race crossing interstellar space, I am just hard pressed to see a mechanical failure or poor piloting causing a crash.

I seen it like this travel from point A to B very fast. Now you would know satellite A would be at your B when you arrived. And at minimum you have a collision. We already know you cannot travel across the stars at less then light travel unless you have 100's to 1000's of years to waste each one way trip.

Well, we do collision avoidance all the time in space when launching something and I am sure ET would do the same. But as pointed out in the previous post, there were no artificial satellites back in 1947.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[DONTEATUS]

Indeed we one data point to work from and that data point is us. But given the dangers and challenges facing any race crossing interstellar space, I am just hard pressed to see a mechanical failure or poor piloting causing a crash.

Well, we do collision avoidance all the time in space when launching something and I am sure ET would do the same. But as pointed out in the previous post, there were no artificial satellites back in 1947.

Cheers,

Badeskov

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

[Technocrat]

I would think that a space-faring race capable of circumventing the dangers of space would be able to navigate around our satellites. Honestly, I personally do not see the crash due to mechanical failure or the like as very plausible. But that just my opinion.

Cheers,

Badeskov

It is my understanding from what I have read that the two flying saucers were accidentally or otherwise brought down at Roswell by the use of two high intensity radar beams which, (radar), seems to interfere with their navigation systems. Also on the night of the crash there was a very violent thunder storm which could also have been a contributing factor.

[S2F]

It is my understanding from what I have read that the two flying saucers were accidentally or otherwise brought down at Roswell by the use of two high intensity radar beams which, (radar), seems to interfere with their navigation systems. Also on the night of the crash there was a very violent thunder storm which could also have been a contributing factor.

I think the point that badeskov is trying to make is that something as innocuous as radar and yes, even lightening, bringing down an interstellar craft would likely mean the craft itself probably would not have survived the trip here to begin with. Even our own passenger airlines get hit on average once a year by lightening and don't drop out of the sky.

[badeskov]

It is my understanding from what I have read that the two flying saucers were accidentally or otherwise brought down at Roswell by the use of two high intensity radar beams which, (radar), seems to interfere with their navigation systems. Also on the night of the crash there was a very violent thunder storm which could also have been a contributing factor.

I too have heard that, however, it is an outright silly idea to be blunt. As S2F correctly stated, space is choke full of radio emissions and cosmic radiation, some orders of magnitude more powerful than anything we could hope to create here on Earth.

So to ech S2F, if they could be brought down by radar (let alone a 1947 era radar), they wouldn't be here in the first place as they couldn't traverse interstellar space.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[badeskov]

I think the point that badeskov is trying to make is that something as innocuous as radar and yes, even lightening, bringing down an interstellar craft would likely mean the craft itself probably would not have survived the trip here to begin with. Even our own passenger airlines get hit on average once a year by lightening and don't drop out of the sky.

Been on 3 flights hit by lightening. Still here :-)

Cheers,

Badeskov

[S2F]

Been on 3 flights hit by lightening. Still here :-)

Cheers,

Badeskov

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

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

[DBunker]

It is my understanding from what I have read that the two flying saucers were accidentally or otherwise brought down at Roswell by the use of two high intensity radar beams which, (radar), seems to interfere with their navigation systems. Also on the night of the crash there was a very violent thunder storm which could also have been a contributing factor.

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

[psyche101]

It must have been a really valuable weather balloon

The operation it was likely initiating certainly was. MOGUL trains had tags on then telling people to stay away and that they claimed flammable and or explosive substances. That got people to call the Military and they got their stuff back, instead of it decorating someones mantle.

Edited April 21, 2013 by psyche101

[badeskov]

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

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

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

[psyche101]

THANK YOU!!!!!

Anthony Bragalia is your saviour?

Desperation has no bounds I take it.

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:

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.

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.

You also seem to have conveniently forgotten this headline:

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.

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.

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!!

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

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.

[psyche101]

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

??

It's not rocket science

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

Edited April 22, 2013 by psyche101