The Roswell Corner
Roswell fool’s gold
Dr. Bill Doleman published his research on the Roswell dig site recently in The Handbook of Space Engineering, Archeology and Heritage edited by Ann Garrison Darrin and Beth Laura O’Leary. He wrote a chapter in the book titled, “Archaeology of the Putative Roswell UFO crash site: A case study.” Most of what I read was a rehash of what was already known from “The Roswell dig diaries” and other sources. The bottom line is that nothing important was found. Dr. Doleman seems to have the opinion that they were not digging in the right place. That is most interesting because this is the place that the HIGHLY RELIABLE Roswell witness Bill Brazel told them was the location of the crash site. Remember he stated it took the ground years to heal back up (even though there is not one single photograph of the impact scar that existed for so long). With such an obvious mark, there should be no mistake as to the location of the site. Maybe Brazel was mistaken or maybe he sort of embellished things a bit. In either case, it demonstrates that, once again, one has to take many of these Roswell UFO crash stories with a grain of salt. Otherwise, you can waste a lot of time and money digging holes in the desert looking for Roswell gold but only finding garbage.
Lost memories of the most memorable event in human history
I was recently going over some newspaper articles in the Roswell daily record of 1981 and found a story with the title of “Author says ‘Roswell Incident’ finds readers around the world” (RDR January 2, 1981 page 6). The author, Lynne Vanns, wrote,
As fate would have it, Haut had a friend in the Eighth Air Force whose job was traveling around the country collecting stories and photos of UFOs.
Just before the crashed weather balloon affair, “He had been showing us the pictures.” The friend told Haut that, as of that time, none of the stories or pictures he’d collected had even a suspicion of being the real thing.
“So I didn’t think much of it and the whole thing died on the base.’’ In fact, Haut said he’d forgotten the whole affair until Charles Berlitz contacted him.
The funny thing about all of this is that in 1981, Haut seems to have forgotten about the greatest event in human history as if nothing of significance had occurred. However, twenty years later, he stated in an affidavit he knew many things about the event including seeing the alien spaceship and bodies. He was suddenly full of details and particulars that supported the crashed spaceship scenario.
The use of the “security oath” excuse seems a bit tired at this point. Nothing stopped Jesse Marcel Sr. from telling his story about what happened so Haut could easily have told the details about this the instant he was interviewed. In over thirty years, not one person out of the dozens who have come forward has been prosecuted in anyway for violating any potential “security oath” associated with the Roswell “incident”!
“A cluster of balloons”
Probably the biggest event on Kevin Randle’s blog had nothing to do with his articles but an on-going tit-for-tat battle that involved Gilles Fernandez, Christopher Allen, “Sourcerer”, and David Rudiak among others. Hundreds of comments were made on two blog entries going over the same old tired ground concerning project MOGUL. Nothing, as usual, was resolved. Nobody can prove conclusively that the flight launched on June 4th did or did not have radar reflectors and could or could not reach the Foster Ranch. Probably the biggest evidence to suggest a cluster of balloons and radar reflector were the source of the debris are the statements by those in 1947, who are known to have recovered it. Both Marcel and Brazel in 1947 made comments that were consistent with materials used by the NYU team in constructing their balloon flights. The photographs of the debris is also consistent with these same materials. Of course, this information does not conclusively prove that what Brazel found was a flight launched by the NYU team but it does increase that possibility. The only way for crashed spaceship proponents to explain these statements is to create a vast complicated conspiracy that forced these men to lie to the media. This logic has been used since the late 1970s and has yet to sway anybody outside the UFO community. Crashed UFO proponents will have to do better if they want to convince those to cross over from the other side. Meanwhile, skeptics, debunkers, and pelicanists (or whatever UFOlogical epithet you want to use) are more than willing to accept the more likely possibility that a large quantity of balloons and radar reflectors (no matter what the source) were found on the Foster Ranch that crazy summer of 1947.
Quelle: SUNlite 1/2011
The Roswell Corner
Glenn Dennis and Walter Haut
Kevin Randle wrote in his blog about his early interviews with Glenn Dennis. Randle confirmed that it was Walter Haut, who directed him towards Dennis. It seems that Haut was quite instrumental in presenting various individuals with dubious stories. According to Randle, Haut stated that the testimony of Kaufmann was highly accurate. In both cases, it seems that Haut was responsible for introducing questionable individuals into the Roswell tale. Why would somebody, who knew so much about what happened, be willing to introduce individuals with stories that were highly questionable and, apparently, false? Was he motivated to promote the spaceship cover-up scenario in order to conceal something else that he did not want everyone to know?
Jerome Clark not a Roswell fan?
Jerome Clark’s letter to James Moseley regarding Roswell was published in the January Issue of Saucer Smear. There, Clark made the following statement about Roswell:
Let me clarify my argument for those who haven’t read the piece. I wrote that however compelling or puzzling it may appear to be, however inadequate critics’ counter-arguments may be shown to be, simple testimony can not establish the authenticity of something so extraordinary as an extraterrestrial crash. Even if the event itself were still covered in official secrecy, it would have all kinds of unconceivable ramifications in post-1947 history. Since even decades later no such ramifications are apparent, we can infer that the recovery of an ET vehicle at Roswell is unlikely even if it remains unclear exactly what did happen there.
There was more verbage about “believers” and “non-believers” but this was the bottom line on the subject. It seems to me that Clark is stating that there is little to no evidence that an alien spaceship crashed at Roswell. He is not taking sides on the issue and wants to appear to sit on the fence post on this. However, his statement that there was no indication of an ET crash, implies that it was a non-event. Isn’t that was skeptics have been saying all along?
“Outing” Roswell scientists
In another lengthy Bragalia piece he suggests that he is going to expose any scientist who was involved with studying crashed material from the Roswell saucer. Highlighted by two unverifiable stories told by scientists, who are currently active, Bragalia makes his case that exotic materials are/were being examined/tested at Lawrence Berkeley labs. Of course, none of these stories can be verified and Bragalia produces no names. This sort of brings into question his integrity when he states he plans on exposing all these scientists who are keeping things secret. Why not start with these two? What makes them so special that they deserve a free pass?
Where are the bodies?
Anthony Bragalia announced to me his latest news that he now knows where the alien bodies/live aliens are located. In his e-mail announcement he declared the Kent Jeffrey was a weak researcher and his work was of questionable quality. That is his opinion but I really can not give credibility to researchers, who put significant weight on hearsay testimony. This kind of thing usually does not stand up in court so I am not sure why it would stand up in actual research. Of course, this is Roswell, where suspect testimony is always welcome as long as it tells us that ET crashed at Roswell. The bottom line is that the bodies are located at the Dugway proving grounds in Utah. Over the years, we have been told they were located at Wright-Patterson, Area 51, Edwards AFB, Dulce, etc. Where next......the White house basement?
The debris field
One of the most popular stories that get circulated about Roswell is the idea that the debris field at the Foster Ranch was this immense area that was littered with hundreds (if not thousands) of small pieces/fragments of metallic material. This is based on the early tellings of the story in the late 1970s by Jesse Marcel and interpreted by film makers and UFOlogists. However, what was the story in 1947? Mack Brazel stated in his Roswell Daily Record interview that the material was “scattered” over an area of about 200 yards. Jesse Marcel told the Fort Worth Telegram in 1947 that they found a few more patches of material when looking about the ranch. These are the only descriptions we have of what the debris field looked like. There are no photographs of the debris field so these early statements are the best we have. Even in the 1970s, Marcel used the term “scattered” when describing the debris field. The term “scattered” indicates material spread out unevenly and not densely packed. Any attempt to suggest the debris field was anything more than that is ignoring these statements in favor of a pre-determined conclusion.
Below: Three versions of the debris field. The top is based on parts of a MOGUL balloon train deposited on a field (Discovery Times - The best evidence - Roswell). The second comes from “UFOs are real” in the 1970s. The last is the debris field as visualized in the Showtime movie “Roswell” based on “UFO crash at Roswell”.
Quelle: SUNlite 2/2011