*Scientific Evidence: Roswell Debris Is of Extraterrestrial Origin* [Video Proof- Skeptics Beware]

This is the proof and evidence that science has been waiting for, REAL SCIENTIFIC PROOF EXAMINED IN ONE OF THE BEST LABS IN THE US, LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LAB. They examined the piece of debris that was taken from an Army Airfield Staff Sgt. in 1947 in Roswell, New Mexico who volunteered to clean up the crashsite. It has been examined and in conclusion, it is of Extraterrestrial Origin!

Roger Lier's Experience With The Roswell Debris

Scientific Evidence of Roswell Debris (Los Alamos Lab Tests)

Hands-on Roswell Debris and Tests

What more proof do skeptics want? We have pilot, astronaut, government agency/intelligence agencies, police officers, military witnesses...etc. testamonies, documents, national archives, video evidence, photographic evidence, radar evidence, ancient carvings from thousands of years ago (B.C.).

Is there any proof we need to confirm this "Conspiracy" is real?

[edit on 26-7-2010 by juice656]

[edit on 26-7-2010 by juice656]

[edit on 26-7-2010 by juice656]

[edit on 26-7-2010 by juice656]

[edit on 26-7-2010 by juice656]

[edit on 26-7-2010 by juice656]

Seriously? A high-speed scientific experiment on alien materials. With a .50 cent lighter?

Come on man, that's why they don't take the real believers serious.

Originally posted by Tnewguy
Seriously? A high-speed scientific experiment on alien materials. With a .50 cent lighter?

Come on man, that's why they don't take the real believers serious.

What about the results from L.A Lab?

reply to post by juice656


I don't see anything here that is convincing me beyond any doubt that this piece was either from the Roswell incident, or that it is of ET origin. Judging by your title, I was expecting something a little more.

--airspoon

Edited to add:

The one guy even says that he is basing his assumption on a "gut-feeling". Also, is that last video a joke? I hope you posted that in a sarcastic attempt to make a serious subject a little "lighter", pardon the pun.






[edit on 27-7-2010 by airspoon]

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by juice656

 

I don't see anything here that is convincing me beyond any doubt that this piece was either from the Roswell incident, or that it is of ET origin. Judging by your title, I was expecting something a little more.

--airspoon

Edited to add:

The one guy even says that he is basing his assumption on a "gut-feeling".

[edit on 26-7-2010 by airspoon]

It was tested scientifically and resulted to not be from Earth and it was manufactured, it belonged to a Staff Sgt. from Roswell Army Airfield in 1947 who passed away because he had cancer, you dont think it's of extraterrestrial origin? It's properties surely aren't, maybe it's too much proof for you to handle.

reply to post by juice656


Look, I'm not saying it didn't happen, only that I'm not convinced that it did. Did something happen? Sure, but as to what has so far only been speculation, hear say or speculation based on hear say.

Let me ask you this, where are the test results and why can't we see them? Where is the official report from the lab?

--airspoon

Most of us know a alien craft went down in Roswell and corona new mexico. The USAF changed the story 3 times and that speaks for itself.. BUT all you did was post youtube videos that are a few years old? Yes they will remain in denial about the witnesses you can not help them. BUT a thread like this sets a bad example because they want physical proof. Some guy in a video saying this and that will not change anything.

Originally posted by juice656
This is the proof and evidence that science has been waiting for, REAL SCIENTIFIC PROOF EXAMINED IN ONE OF THE BEST LABS IN THE US, LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LAB. They examined the piece of debris that was taken from an Army Airfield Staff Sgt. in 1947 in Roswell, New Mexico who volunteered to clean up the crashsite. It has been examined and in conclusion, it is of Extraterrestrial Origin!

Roger Lier's Experience With The Roswell Debris

Scientific Evidence of Roswell Debris (Los Alamos Lab Tests)

Hands-on Roswell Debris and Tests

What more proof do skeptics want? We have pilot, astronaut, government agency/intelligence agencies, police officers, military witnesses...etc. testamonies, documents, national archives, video evidence, photographic evidence, radar evidence, ancient carvings from thousands of years ago (B.C.).

Is there any proof we need to confirm this "Conspiracy" is real?

What a joke thread this is! All threads threatening to expose this or that connected with Roswell always turn out to come from minds that are operating with questionable fuel. You call your lousy offerings (videos, yet!) proof and evidence? Of what?

Your links are not proof and evidence. Your links downright suck. Your first link, a video featuring Mr Leir with a fragment is not proof and evidence and the chain of command is questionable. The fragment was allegedly given to Jim Feuling, a UFO enthusiast, who claims or claimed that the fragment was given to him as collateral for a loan to a friend who was stationed at Roswell Air Base in 1947. Jim believed the story that his friend had stolen the fragment during the cleanup of the crash site. Flags go up immediately for there is no evidence whatsoever that a UFO crashed NEAR Roswell or anywhere on planet earth regardless of who claims so.

Your second link titled "Scientific Evidence of Roswell Debris (Los Alamos Lab Tests)" is another video titled "Proof of Alien Contact - Roswell Debris" No evidence of any "Los Alamos Lab Tests." Escamilla stated it best when he said: "Where's the evidence?"

In your last link nothing is presented to support anything connected with the alleged crash near Roswell. And the guy in the video actually says "...3rd and 4th crash at Roswell" WTF?

Get off your lazy butt and do some real, serious research on Roswell which should take you a few years to digest. You're obviously young and inexperienced otherwise you would not post such crap and try to sound like you know what you're talking about. Tyro!



[edit on 27-7-2010 by The Shrike]

How funny. Another thread with an ignorant title claiming to have somehting that should make "skeptics" trembled. Sad and ignorant.

We should all be skeptics. If we were all skeptic then this subject wouldn't be in the sorry state that it is right now....but moving on....

This thread presents NO verifiable and peer-reviewable evidence of ANYTHING. But don't let that stop you from allowing your clouded "believer vision" to distort your ability to use common sense, reason and logic, lol.

@juice

I would be a little more satisfied if you could provide a PDF link to the Los Alamos findings after peer reviewed. Again a Youtube video taken from a special from the Si Fi channel (yes that is what they call it now) of hearsay. The title of this thread is Scientific Evidence: Roswell Debris Is of Extraterrestrial Origin* [Video Proof- Skeptics Beware] Instances of evidence yes testimony yes but no solid proof. Not how this works kiddo.. sorry but we want more than a song and dance believer or skeptic. I want to find the wreckage myself so i can shut up psuedo skeptics once and for all just like everyone who has seen the writing on the wall. But like someone has all ready said this makes believers look bad.

as a Believer I am Skeptical of all claims until proven

Very bold claims



This thread is a FAIL

[edit on 27-7-2010 by Unknown Soldier]

reply to post by juice656

Nothing new here. But keep your eyes and ears open.
Not too many years left for an eye witness to come forward, But no harm living in hope.
Regards, robbo.

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
Most of us know a alien craft went down in Roswell and corona new mexico.

Actually we don't Unknown Soldier. The Roswell story is so polluted I doubt any truth will ever be garnered from it. The fact that the official story has been changed a few times doesn't make it an alien spacecraft. Sure.. it speaks volumes about the credibility (or lack thereof) of the armed forces but that's all.

What crashed at Roswell is still a mystery to anyone who doesn't have a need to know.

IRM

[edit on 27/7/10 by InfaRedMan]

One of the biggest issues is one that imo, was created by clever disinformation efforts in the last several decades. Professionals, in fear for their jobs, refuse to come up front to admit their findings.

Dr. VernonClark said that tests run by himself, and a separate set of tests run by other scientists at another institution, confirmed that isotopic ratios of several constituent elements in the sample object were very far different from expected terrestrial values. On this basis, he said, he was obliged to conclude the object could not have occurred on earth.

Most chemical elements exist in two or more isotopic forms. An element is defined by its unique number of protons, but its isotopes differ in having more or less neutrons. In the language of chemistry, each proton and neutron has a weight of one; thus, an isotope with more neutrons weighs more than an isotope with less. Extremely sensitive tests can discern these differences in atomic weight, and thus determine the relative percentage of differing isotopes in a given sample.

Furthermore, it is generally agreed that the ratio of isotopic weights for any given element occurring on earth will always be the same, within a very small margin of variance (about 1%). It is thought that these fixed isotopic ratios might be a product of the original formation of elements during the earliest phase of our solar system, as it gradually organized out of the so-called solar nebula. Thus, even elements on Mars should have very nearly the same isotopic ratios as elements on earth.

Dr. VernonClark reported findings on five constitutent elements in the sample. These elements were silicon, silver, nickel, zinc and germanium. In every case, he said, the isotopic ratios varied from the expected norm by an astonishing degree. He said he was almost unable to believe his own results, but concluded he must be right when a second, thus far unnamed, laboratory turned in almost identical findings.

For example, VernonClark reported the test results for silicon, which was found to comprise over 99% of the total sample. In terrestrial silicon there are three stable isotopes: silicon 28, 29, and 30. In normal silicon, isotope 28 will comprise 92% of any sample, but in the tested sample it was only 27%. In normal silicon, isotope 29 is 5%, but in the sample it was 43%. In normal silicon, isotope 30 is 3%, but in the sample it was 30%. According to VernonClark, these huge variances are unheard of in terrestrial elements.

Until more institutions are willing to come right out and say "We tested this.. we stand by our findings," this will continue to be an issue. It's easy to dismiss the findings an organization makes, if we don't know much about it (or anything at all).

Someone needs to step up to the plate.

reply to post by InfaRedMan


Small voice squeaks from the corner of the crowd "I have a need to know".

Original Thread here

Please contribute to the ongoing discussion

Closing Duplicate

Thank you

Semper