Ralph A. Multer and the Roswell UFO

One questionable gap I noticied is that Timkin tried to cut and melt the metal from the UFO, but were unable to. However, how is it that it crashed and was broken in the first place?

Help me out. If this metal is utterly indestructible, than how could the 'UFO' be destroyed by a simple crash landing? How do you obtain multiple pieces of a material that can't be cut or melted? It seems to me the craft ought to have remained intact even if it was disabled. The entire story makes no sense to me.

The inability of our technology to cut or burn the spacecraft material should not be used to discredit this story. It is possible that the energy source used to power the craft was so powerful that if it leaked or surged it could rip the craft apart.

Was there any video evidence of them trying to cut, burn or break this material? I know there are some images of very balloon looking debris.

The inability of our technology to cut or burn the spacecraft material should not be used to discredit this story. It is possible that the energy source used to power the craft was so powerful that if it leaked or surged it could rip the craft apart. I think I'd like to stay within the realm of known physics.

Roswell has been done to death. Of all the UFO stories in the world, that people still focus on this one drives me crazy! Restating the same evidence and the same witnesses in different formats will not prove anything. I am so sick of hearing about it. There are so many more recent cases that people could be focused on. (Some where witnesses are still, you know, alive!) I think we need to get over it already. I don't think we can ever know what really happened.

One questionable gap I noticied is that Timkin tried to cut and melt the metal from the UFO, but were unable to. However, how is it that it crashed and was broken in the first place? Yes, the unbreakable materials that broke. So many seem to miss that obvious discrepancy. Also, try to find any tech in the crash. Apparently if a craft did crash it was just a metal envelope. No engines, no electronics, nothing. Just rather tough paper and very strong metal And this is if the witness reports could be confirmed, which they are not. And this apparent mountain of debris all came from a craft witness... [More]

I find 2 things stand out particularly in the article (apart from not a single employee being able to verify his claim) 1 - “Timken probably would have had a reputation for developing very strong materials at very high temperatures,” said Friedman, 76, a nuclear physicist. 2 - “If all this was so top secret,” he wrote, “why would the government hire some no-name, non-governmental truck driver to haul the greatest discovery in the history of civilization?”

The Roswell ETH is a joke. I honestly do not know why grown men chase fairy tales. It's a tad embarrassing. Then why are there still two false Roswell cover stories in effect to this very day? And remember, the Air Force trashed its 47-year weather balloon cover story, knowingly, it knew as false, and replaced it with another false cover story, and yet added its third false cover story involving test dummies and accident victims of the 1950s. I might add, that the Air Force's project officer for those test dummy operations of the 1950s, had supplied material used in the Air Force's 1997 Roswel... [More]

Then why are there still two false Roswell cover stories in effect to this very day? Only in your mind. The USAF said a balloon went down in 1947, and they are still saying a balloon went down. All that has changed is the project the ballon was involved in due to classification of the project in order to avert WW3 in 1947 as the project put forth by the USAF was spying on Russia. Now believers? One crash site is now two 4 witness are now 600 witnesses 4 hours to 2 weeks incarceration for Brazel Aliens appeared in 1978, before then they were not a part of this tale A ballon train could not be a... [More]