Roswell--Why did the Army even make a press release about a recovered disc?

You have to place the announcement of flying disc in context of 1947 not 2017. A little over a week earlier Kenneth Arnold's sighting had occurred. People would not necessarily associate it as describing an alien craft back in 1947. In 1947 there was no history of UFOs, like we have now, to relate these sightings to. The actual alien stories didn't start until the late 1980s/1990s when people like Glenn Dennis appeared.

With all the media reports of the previous week or so Col. Blanchard, jumped the gun, probably believing his base would be first to parade one of these strange discs to media. But then a cover-up started. Many debunkers and the official line (or at least the last official line) of the USAF is that it was a Top Secret Mogul Balloon.

It's interesting to also note that 20 years after Roswell. Despite a major UFO flap during 1947 that Roswell was seen as a PR blunder

While newspapers still carried a few apparently genuine UFO reports – often buried among a mish-mash of superficial nonsense -- the kind of stories that made headlines after July 8th were the sort a reader found impossible to take seriously. If a report wasn’t an out-and-out hoax, it was an embarrassingly obvious mistake.

One of those mistakes, given the widest possible publicity, had its origins near Roswell, New Mexico, when a farmer named William W. ("Mac") Brazel discovered the wreckage of a disc on his ranch near Corona, early in July. After hearing news broadcasts of flying saucer reports, Brazel, who had stored pieces of the disc in a barn, notified the Sheriff’s Office in Roswell, who, in turn, notified Major Jesse A. Marcel, of the Roswell Army Air Field intelligence offlce. The remnants of the disc were taken to Roswell Field for examination. Through a series of clumsy blunders in public relations, and a desire by the press to manufacture a crashed disc if none would obligingly crash of itself, the story got blown up out of all proportions that read :


"Crashed Disc Found in New Mexico."


According to AP on July 8th, public information officer Lt. Walter Haught (sic) made an announcement of the discovery: “The many rumors regarding the flying disc became a reality yesterday when the intelligence office of the 509th Bomb Group of the Eighth Air Force, Roswell Army Air Field, was fortunate enough to gain possession of a disc through the cooperation of one of the local ranchers and the sheriffs offlce of Chavez County.”

The effect of this reckless statement was equal to an atomic detonation; results were immediate. While newspaper deluged the air base for additional information, a search party was sent out to scour the landing site for additional fragments; the collected remains of whatever it was that had crashed on Brazel’s ranch were taken to Eighth Air Force headquarters in Fort Worth,Texas. There, Brigadier General Roger M. Ramey tried to clarify matters by first explaining that no one had actually seen the object in the air; that the remains were of a flimsy construction; that it was partially composed of tinfoil; and, finally, that it was the wreckage of "a high altitude weather device."

Warrant Office Irving Newton, a weather forecaster at the Fort Worth Weather Station, had identified the crashed "disc" as the remains of weather equipment used widely by weather stations around the country when sending balloons aloft to measure wind directions and velocity.

There remains the possibility that some super-secret upper-atmospheric balloon experiment had crashed near Corona, which would have accounted for all the confusion and secrecy involved in its recovery.

Whether the pictured balloon equipment carried widely in the press was actually a photograph of the recovered fragments remained a question, but news editors should have been on their toes: other similar incidents had already been reported, like the discovery several days before of the weather device at Circleville, Ohio. The New Mexico incident created uproar in Washington, and high Army Air Force officials were reported to have delivered a blistering rebuke to Roswell Field spokesmen for having fostered the confusion. But the damage had already been done and the next day “Another Saucer Shot Down” was typical of the headlines found in American papers.

See : The Report on the UFO Wave of 1947 by Ted Bloecher : PDF Link

Was it simply a Mogul balloon that needed to be kept secret or did the cover-up go a hell of a lot deeper?

a reply to: schuyler

According to Wiki the project ran from 47-49.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

I believe we are not the only one's I've seen a Tuna Can in broad day light but cant be sure it just wasn't a freak satellite. But when it comes to the Government I automatically crawl in a hole of disbelief.

originally posted by: TobyFlenderson
a reply to: MrParanoid

I heard a great conspiracy theory about this on a recent podcast. Jack Parsons (one of the founders of the Jet Propulsion Lab) and L. Ron Hubbard (founder of Scientology) were both members of an OTO lodge in Calif. They performed some rituals of Alastair Crowley that supposedly opened a portal to another dimension. This was all done under the auspices of the CIA. The aliens that crashed were actually beings that entered through the portal. The UFO was a cover story because the CIA didn't want the public knowing that they had just been instrumental in opening Pandora's Box. The CIA then continued to use the UFO lie as a psy-op till the current day.

I don't believe this but still find it quite interesting.

It would make a better theory if they swapped Hubbard for somebody a wee bit less of a charlatan and nut.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: schuyler

According to Wiki the project ran from 47-49.

The Wiki article assumes Roswell was a balloon. The article states: "This article needs additional citations for verification." and uses only sources that agree with it. In other words, it is hardly definitive. If you look in the "talk" portion of the article you will find a great deal of controversy as various authors keep changing the article to their own point of view. Just one exchange out of many:

I'm afraid it was YOU who took a short NPOV article, decided to make it very pro-Mogul POV for the Roswell Incident by cherrypicking a few quotes and leaving everything contradictory out. All I did was put it back into context, e.g., pointing out that a few carefully picked quotes in isolation don't tell the full story.

Source

In other words, use Wiki with the utmost care.

a reply to: schuyler

I rarely use Wiki for anything. It was the first to pop up when I had a glance. I have always thought that the first description of aluminium foil and balsa wood (paraphrase) sounded like some sort of balloon. No big deal to me either way, I was really just making a passing comment.

originally posted by: MrParanoid
a reply to: midicon

But they could've said it was anything--a B-17, a prototype jet, or whatever. Why choose a flying disc of all things?

According to the story, they find bits of aluminum foil that would crumple up and straighten out. They also find bits of wood with lettering on it along with four humanoid figures. If it were a spherical balloon that popped, it would flatten out to a disc. So therefore a flying disc would seem the most logical.

I think they needed to get the word out fast. There were probably people in the know that needed to be reached in a hurry. Maybe they were in remote areas of New Mexico and needed to be notified so they could get back to base quickly. Radio was used to reach them. The balloon story never made much sense to me. Why would anyone think a balloon over our own airspace was so important.

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: schuyler

According to Wiki the project ran from 47-49.

The Wiki article assumes Roswell was a balloon. The article states: "This article needs additional citations for verification." and uses only sources that agree with it. In other words, it is hardly definitive. If you look in the "talk" portion of the article you will find a great deal of controversy as various authors keep changing the article to their own point of view. Just one exchange out of many:

I'm afraid it was YOU who took a short NPOV article, decided to make it very pro-Mogul POV for the Roswell Incident by cherrypicking a few quotes and leaving everything contradictory out. All I did was put it back into context, e.g., pointing out that a few carefully picked quotes in isolation don't tell the full story.

Source

In other words, use Wiki with the utmost care.

I have seen the project mogul logs, they were definitely launching the radiosonde balloon trains in the months prior to Mack Brazeal's discovery.

I have wondered that myself. Then they turned around and changed their story three or four times. "It was a disc. No, it was a weather balloon. No, it was an experimental aircraft with crash test dummies." I just can't take anything they say about the Roswell event seriously, sooo... Guess what I think. Heh, but like you said, that's beyond the scope of your point.

a reply to: MrParanoid

I can only think some over anxious military journalist officer got really excited with a "Wowee!!!! I got a get this out! "...bypassing chain of command.

Anyone know who wrote the release? By the military.. sure... But who wrote the release? Like a "Beetle Bailey" type? (Comic character)

originally posted by: Drunkenparrot

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: schuyler

According to Wiki the project ran from 47-49.

The Wiki article assumes Roswell was a balloon. The article states: "This article needs additional citations for verification." and uses only sources that agree with it. In other words, it is hardly definitive. If you look in the "talk" portion of the article you will find a great deal of controversy as various authors keep changing the article to their own point of view. Just one exchange out of many:

I'm afraid it was YOU who took a short NPOV article, decided to make it very pro-Mogul POV for the Roswell Incident by cherrypicking a few quotes and leaving everything contradictory out. All I did was put it back into context, e.g., pointing out that a few carefully picked quotes in isolation don't tell the full story.

Source

In other words, use Wiki with the utmost care.

I have seen the project mogul logs, they were definitely launching the radiosonde balloon trains in the months prior to Mack Brazeal's discovery.

Great! Why not post them?

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: schuyler

I rarely use Wiki for anything. It was the first to pop up when I had a glance. I have always thought that the first description of aluminium foil and balsa wood (paraphrase) sounded like some sort of balloon. No big deal to me either way, I was really just making a passing comment.

Great research! Thanks!

a reply to: jordan77

There's actually a factual basis. Hubbard was a member of the OTO and did perform these rituals with Parsons. However, he eventually stole Parson's wife and his life savings and used the money to buy his first yacht.

originally posted by: MrParanoid
a reply to: midicon

But they could've said it was anything--a B-17, a prototype jet, or whatever. Why choose a flying disc of all things?

Exactly!

and an even better question would be,
Why this time?

surely they have recovered crashed aircraft and weather balloons many many times before that but they have NEVER issued a press release like that, either before then or since then when recovering crashed weather balloons and aircraft.

If there is no truth to it then why didn`t they just issue the standard press release that they always released up to that time,when recovering crashed aircraft and weather balloons?

originally posted by: mirageman
You have to place the announcement of flying disc in context of 1947 not 2017. A little over a week earlier Kenneth Arnold's sighting had occurred. People would not necessarily associate it as describing an alien craft back in 1947. In 1947 there was no history of UFOs, like we have now, to relate these sightings to. The actual alien stories didn't start until the late 1980s/1990s when people like Glenn Dennis appeared.

With all the media reports of the previous week or so Col. Blanchard, jumped the gun, probably believing his base would be first to parade one of these strange discs to media. But then a cover-up started. Many debunkers and the official line (or at least the last official line) of the USAF is that it was a Top Secret Mogul Balloon.

This is why I don't want to debate whether it was a UFO, a weather balloon, or whatever else it may have been. The question is about the press release itself which, as you mention, should be looked at from a 1947 perspective. And as you point out, if Col. Blanchard did in fact "jump the gun" the question is why would he do so prior to confirming what it was they had in their possession? Or, if that wasn't what was recovered, why make a statement in regards to a flying disc at all?

I have a hard time chalking this up to a mere "PR blunder" given that 70 years later, it's still a headache for the government. And again, if it was just a mistake, how many people within the Army let that slip by?

a reply to: Tardacus

What I'd like to see (and I'm not in the position to research this at the moment) are typical Army press releases from that time, especially immediately before and after Roswell. What was the Army given to say about accidents and what have you. This seems to stray so far from what I'm assuming the norm was that it's just absurd. So what made them go that route in this instance?

mirageman

Just found this ..it is supposed to be the original radio broadcasts. Thought maybe you would be interested in hearing the actual reports..



And the newspaper reports...

Thanks,
blend57

I was just discussing this. My first thoughts were if they said it was a flying disc that must have been the initial truth. Then the cover up.

I find it hard to believe that the USAF couldn't tell the diffrence for one of its own projects supposedly some of which have been found before.

So really you have to ask yourself was it
1.a flying disc
2.a weather balloon
3. Crash test dummies
Which was the lie?

It could have been a ruse to divert Soviet spies.
They were developing some high tech at the time.
Throw out the red herring.

Claiming this was a balloon is like claiming this was swamp gas. To believe it was a balloon you have to believe that the US Military couldn't have identified it. The fact is, during that time, the military used balloons every single day for meteorology on airfields. The men there new what balloons were. They knew what balsa wood was. They knew what balloons were made of. And they could certainly identify a crash test dummy if they found one. To claim that this group of men, in charge of the only US Bomber group authorized to carry nuclear weapons, were dumber than dirt is not only a disservice to them, but completely laughable. You can't seriously expect anyone to believe that.

Plus you have the witnesses. Can you seriously claim that Glenn Dennis was not a good witness? You know what the ONE THING one researcher "got" on him that made this researcher say Dennis was "discredited"? Dennis did not give the real name of the nurse who saw the bodies in order to protect her identity. That's it. That's the ONLY reason some people have decided he is 'discredited.' How lame is that? When skeptics pull swamp gas from wherever they find it, it's time to strike a match because their explanations are far more ludicrous than the initial story.