It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by pellian
reply to post by Arbitrageur
Yes. Use Occams razor the simplest explanation is the most correct one. I wish people would use critical thinking skills instead of blind belief in the bizarre
Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by The Shrike
Thanks for answering the questions, appreciate it. Of course, we still have no "proof" this debris was actually recovered from Roswell (only that the military claims this is what the material is),
just as we have not "proof" Mogul flight 4 even existed, other than witness testimony
Too bad on the flowery tape. Moore's claim of using this tape from a NY toy company always seems to hit a dead end, and it would be a pretty crucial piece of evidence for supporting Mogul, if the company/tape could be identified.
Part of the problem may be the same thing plaguing pro-UFO researchers...the records fire of 1947...which also made it hard to track all of the transfers after RAAF became part of the Air Force after the National Security Act. Admittedly, this could also be the reason for the lack of info on all of the Mogul flights. Almost every piece of evidence can be a double edged sword in this case.
I'm not sure if I've seen this mentioned, but there is another issue with the memo. The photographer states that he gave Ramey the piece of paper to hold for the photo. Now, all we have is his testimony this was the case, but if so, it would seem highly doubtful that a classified memo would just be "out" for the photographer to grab and hand to him. Then again, his testimony, as with other witnesses, was years and years later, so all we can do is consider it, in the evaluation of the memo. I personally think it much more likely that his aide handed him the memo just as he was posing for the pic, but there's really no way to be certain of the circumstances of when and why he's holding it in the pics.
Originally posted by The Shrike
The truth came out in 1947 but people such as yourself does not accept the truth, you seem to be happy with the conspiraces that have arisen thanks to the popular authors, initiated by Mr get-out-of-my-way-I'm-on-my-way-to-the-bank Friedman.
Originally posted by The Shrike
Anyone that posits questionable material has to be notified of such. Do YOU really believe that a UFO crashed near Roswell and that alien bodies were removed? Do you really believe that UFOs crash willy-nilly all over the planet? If you do, you have a lot of introspecting to do.
Why are you posting comments like this when you have no indication that believe that something crashed in Roswell? Your knee-jerk reaction to criticism is to instantly assume all of my beliefs are different than yours, and must be changed through research?
Originally posted by The Shrike
Find the irrefutable evidence to support Roswell and I mean something solid not all of the stuff that's been shot down by critical researchers, such as Karl Pflock. Read his book and see why Roswell was not a UFO crash. There are other authors so don't nitpick him without doing the research.
Originally posted by The Shrike
A few other members, some well-known to the world, that exhibit critical thinking also get on the believers' case. When the less-educated insult a highly-educate authority such as James Oberg, do you get on their case? When Arbitrageur, or Phage, or any of the critical thinkers tell a believer he is not using all of his marbles and coming to errroneous conclusions, do you get on their cases? Aren't you being selective here?
I don't see you getting on their case. Why do you single me out?
Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
On the analysis of the document in Ramey's hand and how it got in his hand in the first place:
I think the analysis shows enough to determine that whatever crashed wasn't a weather balloon. I also think if Ramey is scrambling to first contain the disc story by discrediting it, and the best he could come up with was a flipping weather balloon on short notice, then I don't see why he wouldn't have a memo handed to him just as the press conference was starting - that things were probably hopping like crazy with changing the story and disposition of the real wreckage are legitimate conjectures.
The initial news story straight out of the 509th at Roswell was a flying disc, only to be countermanded the next day by the commanding general of the 8th Airforce who wasn't even there.
I find it hard to believe that the elite 509th bombing group would have an intelligence officer incapable of identifying the wreckage of a balloon from that of a metallic craft, of either alien or terrestrial origin.
And if he was so incompetent, why the promotions and later assignments to more and more important posts?
On the legibility study I cited earlier in the thread, the words "balloon" and "Fort Worth" were among the few that were almost universally legible, so this suggests that parts of it can be read. But other parts of it are guesswork.
Originally posted by The Shrike
In 1980, Sparks was the first person to be able to read a word in the Ramey message: "BALLOONS." In 1985, working from a good blowup copy of one of the photographs, he was able to pick out: "WEATHER BALLOONS," '"DISC,"' "LAND," and "FORT WORTH."
Because "balloon" is one of the few words that everyone agrees on? How does that rule out a balloon? And Mogul, if that's what they found, wasn't a weather balloon. Please catch up to at least the 1994 claims by the air force, because if you are going to dispute their claims you should at least dispute their latest claim and not the one they made in 1947.
Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
I think the analysis shows enough to determine that whatever crashed wasn't a weather balloon.
What makes you think infrared would help in the Ramey memo? It won't.
Originally posted by The Shrike
Until someone uses the method I mentioned above (infra-red) I don't think that the Ramey memo will give up its secrets.
Originally posted by Krusty the Klown
Originally posted by Krusty the Klown
reply to post by The Shrike
You still haven't answered my question The Shrike.
Why are you here? You say you already know the answer to this issue. So why do waste your time on these threads?
Do you believe you are really helping people by insulting them?
This is the third time I'm asking this question The Shrike.
Why won't you answer it?
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Originally posted by The Shrike
(snip)
Until someone uses the method I mentioned above (infra-red) I don't think that the Ramey memo will give up its secrets.
What makes you think infrared would help in the Ramey memo? It won't.
You need an original document like the dead sea scrolls for that method to help, and we don't have that.
However, I do think that modern scanning technology is improving at a rate that rescanning the negative again with a higher quality, higher resolution scanner may yield additional details.edit on 30-12-2010 by Arbitrageur because: fix typo
Originally posted by pellian
reply to post by Arbitrageur
Yes. Use Occams razor the simplest explanation is the most correct one. I wish people would use critical thinking skills instead of blind belief in the bizarre
OK has this infrared method ever been used on a negative?
Originally posted by The Shrike
If you can work with the original negative and produce a positive print, or do it in the digital domain bypassing a print, I have faith (not meant religiously) that using the infra-red method would reveal more legible words than present efforts from bad copies.
When you guys get through venting your spleens with worthless decipherments of the Ramey Memo, try your hand at the Voynich Manuscript which might say something about Roswell and alien bodies and Elvis and Hoffa!
Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by The Shrike
Some interesting ideas on that method. I'd be all for increased efforts on the memo, whether it supports the Roswell crash or is unrelated.
When you guys get through venting your spleens with worthless decipherments of the Ramey Memo, try your hand at the Voynich Manuscript which might say something about Roswell and alien bodies and Elvis and Hoffa!
Yeah, I've looked into that one before. Quite cryptic, and very mysterious. It seems like an alchemical codex, but deciphering who wrote it, and why, has proven impossible for even top cryptologists. For anyone who has never heard of the Voynich Manuscript, check into it. Just shows how weird our world can be.
Originally posted by Krusty the Klown
Originally posted by pellian
reply to post by Arbitrageur
Yes. Use Occams razor the simplest explanation is the most correct one. I wish people would use critical thinking skills instead of blind belief in the bizarre
Ok let's use Occams razor for the Roswell media release in which the document in question is seen.
The army wants to keep secret a top secret balloon experiment that crashed, so first they issue a press with the biggest news story of the 20th Century - captured alien saucer. Not exactly the best way to keep something quiet.
Then they realise this is causing too much interest, so they try to hide their balloon experiment by saying its a balloon experiment.
Why did they just not do that in the first place?
We are talking about the 509th wing remember - the most important bomber wing in the world at the time.
This series of events is not the simplest way to conceal a mogul balloon crash and therefore mogul is likely NOT the simplest solution
Why not just say it was something mundane like a crashed plane. That is the simplest solution to covering a mogul crash.
How are you logically supposed to keep something quiet by telling everyone its a crashed flying saucer?
If the press release originally said it was a weather balloon no one would have cared in the first place. That is the best way to keep the mogul secret.
It is just not logical therefore Occams razor says the mogul solution is not likely the correct solution.
Disclaimer for The Shrike: I still do not subscribe to the crashed saucer solution even though you will likely say I do because I questioned your methods and your attitude.edit on 30/12/1010 by Krusty the Klown because: (no reason given)