Phillip Corso and his book The Day After Roswell???

I just got this book, and started reading it. I am very curious to know what other ATS members think of the book?


I personally have a hard time believing everything, but its so far out there and almost surreal that it would hard to believe even if all the facts and evidence were shown to you in person.


is what I find the most fascinating about the whole story is how the US govt harvested technology like IC chips, fibe optics, etc.........


One thing I found very very intresting was the point that someone reviewing the book on amazon made

"If you ask yourself who invented the cotton gin, you probably know. But, the greatest inventions of our time such as silicon based computer chips and fiber optics, as well as lasers are not attributed to inventors. That is because, as Corso so generously enlightens us, we stole the technology from aliens... "

While I suppose it is posible that all these things are harvested or scanevged alien technology. I think that all these inovations and inventions are just the culmination of lots, and lots of very smart hard working people's work over the last 150 years or so. All the work started to really bear fruit from the 50's on or so. I do find it a strange coiencedence that lots of breathroughs were made after the roswell incident.

So do you think Corso's whole story, and his book are legit, and the real story in your opinion??

thanks




[edit on 8-9-2004 by boosted]

We've discussed it before, but I too have trouble with the newer search..

Other than a little (okay, a lot) of self glorification of Corso... I think it's on the money. Most UFO researchers know of Twining very well, and Corso's connection to him cannot be disputed. If the Roswell incident was really a crashed spacecraft (and I believe it was), then Twining would have been the one involved in exactly what Corso described, and so, Corso as well.

There is ample evidence that the one credited with the transistor did not in fact come up with it (was even a debate here, as I recall). Other than a few timeline slips (easily accountable by remembering events years back), he makes a pretty solid and compelling case for who he was, and what he did... He also makes a lot of suppositions though (even though he states them as such), such as the moonbase, etc. so be careful there. He claims there were plans for it, but he admits to not being involved with it, and that he doesn't know if it was built or not. Such items tend to make him less credible, but it appears he was simply tossing it out there...

Remember, even Corso admits that the foundations were already there for these devices....and that the debris simply helped them along....

AH AH AH YOU SAY CORSO
MR. CORSO DON'T HAVE ANY MEMORY...he he he

I have a proof

I believe the Roswell incident is the one event (if I had to pick one.) that shows the basis for the existence of visiting EBEs. Having said that, microchips and the like, developed by corporations have the rights to such things and don't give credit to one person for proprietary reasons. That may be why an inventor of such things isn't listed. Case in point, a good friend of mine Dad work at Oak Rdge and developed a method of welding metal plates for reactors. He got one dollar and a certificate, the gov't got patent.

Oh, yeah-Boosted have you read UFO Crash at Roswell by Kevin Randall, I liked that one, seemed fairly balanced.

[edit on 8-9-2004 by Der Kapitan]

COLONEL CORSO WRITE A BOOK

In DECEMBRE I WILL BE A SECOND W. SHAKESPEARE

Originally posted by Der Kapitan
I believe the Roswell incident is the one event (if I had to pick one.) that shows the basis for the existence of visiting EBEs. Having said that, microchips and the like, developed by corporations have the rights to such things and don't give credit to one person for proprietary reasons. That may be why an inventor of such things isn't listed. Case in point, a good friend of mine Dad work at Oak Rdge and developed a method of welding metal plates for reactors. He got one dollar and a certificate, the gov't got patent.

Oh, yeah-Boosted have you read UFO Crash at Roswell by Kevin Randall, I liked that one, seemed fairly balanced.

[edit on 8-9-2004 by Der Kapitan]

no I havent't read that book, and as a matter of fact The Day After Roswell is the first book of its kind I have read, and I'm only about a 1/3 of the way thru it.


As for the whole corporations owning the patents, taking the credit etc.. for inventions I know what you mean, but I still dont understand how it was never really revealved to the public who invented fiber optics, lasers, IC microprocessor's etc...


I mean I know that Charles Babbage built his diffrence engine in the 1800's, and Alan Turing had the basic idea for software in the early 1900's and many other things like that. I would like to know who, or what organization is credited with inventing or at least making stuff work like the IC chip/microprocessor, fiber optics, kevlar, lasers etc....




Chapo: what does the comment "In DECEMBRE I WILL BE A SECOND W. SHAKESPEARE" supposed to mean??? That Corso wrote the book to try and be a Shakespeare?????

[edit on 8-9-2004 by boosted]

Never doubt a human brain, there are really smart people out there, above that, i doubt the probability that we are using ET technology.

[edit on 8-9-2004 by partykid]

I'm not questioning nor under estimating the power of the human brain, I'm just wondering who or what orginazation is credited with some of these inventions?

For instance Alexander Graham Bell is credited with inventing the phone

Edison the lightbulb

Einstein, Fermi and Oppenheimer with nuke power, and bombs

Bob Metcalfe and Dave Boggs with Ethernet


I was wondering who invented stuff like Fiber optics and microprocessors, so I did a little searching on the net and came accross some stuff like

Corning Glass researchers Robert Maurer, Donald Keck and Peter Schultz invented fiber optic wire or "Optical Waveguide Fibers" (patent #3,711,262)

others say that the "optical telegraph" that French engineer Claude Chappe was invented in the 1790s

and

"In 1951, Holger M�ller [or Moeller, the o has a slash through it] Hansen applied for a Danish patent on fiber-optic imaging. However, the Danish patent office denied his application, citing the Baird and Hansell patents, and M�ller Hansen was unable to interest companies in his invention. Nothing more was reported on fiber bundles until 1954, when Abraham van Heel of the Technical University of Delft in Holland and Harold. H. Hopkins and Narinder Kapany of Imperial College in London separately announced imaging bundles in the prestigious British journal Nature."

here is the link to that story

www.sff.net...

Some people say that the first real micro processor was invented in 1971 by a team of researchers at Intel.

I think the slow progession of invention and inovation by hard workings smart humans is much more plausible than the alien theory. if you think about it more people (scientists, researchers, inventors, and thinkers) are alive today than ever in history, and they can pickup where others left off so to speak and keep going. people today can learn and evolve from others findings in years pasts. I must say Corso's book is intresting none the less, and I have a feeling he wrote if for fun almost or something like that?

Originally posted by boosted
I'm not questioning nor under estimating the power of the human brain, I'm just wondering who or what orginazation is credited with some of these inventions?

For instance Alexander Graham Bell is credited with inventing the phone

Edison the lightbulb

Einstein, Fermi and Oppenheimer with nuke power, and bombs

Bob Metcalfe and Dave Boggs with Ethernet


I was wondering who invented stuff like Fiber optics and microprocessors, so I did a little searching on the net and came accross some stuff like

Corning Glass researchers Robert Maurer, Donald Keck and Peter Schultz invented fiber optic wire or "Optical Waveguide Fibers" (patent #3,711,262)

others say that the "optical telegraph" that French engineer Claude Chappe was invented in the 1790s

and

"In 1951, Holger M�ller [or Moeller, the o has a slash through it] Hansen applied for a Danish patent on fiber-optic imaging. However, the Danish patent office denied his application, citing the Baird and Hansell patents, and M�ller Hansen was unable to interest companies in his invention. Nothing more was reported on fiber bundles until 1954, when Abraham van Heel of the Technical University of Delft in Holland and Harold. H. Hopkins and Narinder Kapany of Imperial College in London separately announced imaging bundles in the prestigious British journal Nature."

here is the link to that story

www.sff.net...

Some people say that the first real micro processor was invented in 1971 by a team of researchers at Intel.

I think the slow progession of invention and inovation by hard workings smart humans is much more plausible than the alien theory. if you think about it more people (scientists, researchers, inventors, and thinkers) are alive today than ever in history, and they can pickup where others left off so to speak and keep going. people today can learn and evolve from others findings in years pasts. I must say Corso's book is intresting none the less, and I have a feeling he wrote if for fun almost or something like that?

We call that industrial espionage. ENOUGH???

What I found to be convincing about the book:

-The extreme compartmentalization of the subject that Corso claims occured after Roswell. I find the 'bureaucratic amnesia' he describes to be very believable... if something that big was to have been kept secret, you really would have to make this research an almost after hour activity without a single, central directive.
-The fact that Corso only saw bits and pieces of the wreckage. This fits in with the canonical description (looking at initial reports and reliable eyewitnesses) of a crash site that was a scattered field of strange debris. It also dovetails with the notion that the air force would have kept possession of the main body of the craft.... if one was recovered.
-Corso's own egotistical storytelling, in a way, makes him believable. It makes him seem like he doesn't know the whole story... which is what one would expect if this were real.
- His own political/philosophical viewpoints are what one would expect of a military officer. They're very xenophobic and 'toe the line' with the national mottos of the cold war era USA. Simply put: he has the ideology that a career military man in that position would have had. If he had started talking about greater metaphysical issues and the role of human consciousness within the galaxy-- which are legitimate topics when it comes to the ET question, mind you -- I think he would have discredited himself. Sorry if this sounds biased, but there aren't too many 'big idea' guys in the military.

What I have problems with:
-It's unclear as to what he is and is not taking credit for. His story makes it seem like he introduced all of these ideas to industry... but some items -- esp. things like transistors and integrated circuits -- predate his assignment to the 'Nut File' (or whatever he called it). When you read more closely... it becomes unclear if he's occasionally talking about other UFO back-engineering projects that he had knowledge of but won't connect to individuals.
-The assertion that we have a complete, integrated UFO defense today. Then, again... maybe he THINKS we do.
-His constant hostility towards civilians and civilian programs (like NASA). This makes his story more believable... to a certain degree... but it also makes him sound too edgy and angry. When a guy fumes about civilian control of the government for a few pages on end he begins to look like a kook.


[edit on 8-9-2004 by onlyinmydreams]

Oh, yeah-Boosted have you read UFO Crash at Roswell by Kevin Randall, I liked that one, seemed fairly balanced.

It is a good book. He also partnered with another researcher at times, Donald Schmidt, both of whom I had the pleasure of meeting once...

Good points there OIMD...

What I have problems with:
-It's unclear as to what he is and is not taking credit for. His story makes it seem like he introduced all of these ideas to industry... but some items -- esp. things like transistors and integrated circuits -- predate his assignment to the 'Nut File' (or whatever he called it). When you read more closely... it becomes unclear if he's occasionally talking about other UFO back-engineering projects that he had knowledge of but won't connect to individuals.

I think a lot of this may be due to the fact that once the debris was allocated, the project was completely out of his hands (for obvious reasons of distancing) and so alot of this are his "assumptions" as to what the items contributed to...

-The assertion that we have a complete, integrated UFO defense today. Then, again... maybe he THINKS we do.

There is a lot of evidence to support this. We don't have near the level of sightings as we did then. Also, there is such evidence as NASA footage of an apparent system vs. UFOs, numerous classified military satellites going up in the 80's, Reagan's insistance on SDI. The fact that HEL systems and EMP weapons have already been acknowledged somewhat by the military, etc. And the biggest reason...well, they haven't taken us over yet!

-His constant hostility towards civilians and civilian programs (like NASA). This makes his story more believable... to a certain degree... but it also makes him sound too edgy and angry. When a guy fumes about civilian control of the government for a few pages on end he begins to look like a kook.

This is exactly what I'd expect of a military officer who saw a military project end up in civilian hands...nothing else gets under an officer's skin like that....

I wrote a piece which coincides with your thoughts. The day after Roswell and subsequent technological advancements are discussed here.

BC

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hey GAZ YOU SAY VERY WELL A COLONEL DoD WILL NEVER WRITE A BOOK

IF IT IS SO WHY AMIRAL BYRD DON'T WRITE NOTHING COMMING

BACK FROM SOUT POLE

Off on a tangent - sorry.

One of the most interesting and suddenly useful items I noticed is that under the posters names
there appears an item called "Ignore this user".
I elect to use it on chapo as I have yet see anything of real contribution by him/her/it in any thead.

Originally posted by Chuck Stevenson
Off on a tangent - sorry.

One of the most interesting and suddenly useful items I noticed is that under the posters names
there appears an item called "Ignore this user".
I elect to use it on chapo as I have yet see anything of real contribution by him/her/it in any thead.

LOL.You are exactly right! chapo you are going to get an award! The most ignored user of the month!

Giving the benefit of the doubt first, as I'm assuming English is a second language?

Hey GAZ YOU SAY VERY WELL A COLONEL DoD WILL NEVER WRITE A BOOK

IF IT IS SO WHY AMIRAL BYRD DON'T WRITE NOTHING COMMING

BACK FROM SOUT POLE

Perhaps you could clarify?

As it stands now, you are stating that I claimed Corso didn't write a book, whereas I made no such claim... Huh?

Your posts are beginning to be more difficult to decipher than the most enigmatic Nostrodamus quatrains.... That's fine though, I can think of some good posters here, who have improved their English quite well on this board (Nans comes to mind). One thing...try hitting the key that says Caps Lock (as it appears to be stuck)....

Back on topic...

Any more thoughts on Corso's book?



[edit on 9-9-2004 by Gazrok]

Originally posted by partykid

Originally posted by Chuck Stevenson
Off on a tangent - sorry.

One of the most interesting and suddenly useful items I noticed is that under the posters names
there appears an item called "Ignore this user".
I elect to use it on chapo as I have yet see anything of real contribution by him/her/it in any thead.

LOL.You are exactly right! chapo you are going to get an award! The most ignored user of the month!

Bolchoye sposiba RUSSIA ���

Russian, now that's a difficult language...ended up dropping it in college when the Berlin wall fell and I saw my career aspirations go up in smoke, hehe....

Originally posted by Chuck Stevenson
Off on a tangent - sorry.

One of the most interesting and suddenly useful items I noticed is that under the posters names
there appears an item called "Ignore this user".
I elect to use it on chapo as I have yet see anything of real contribution by him/her/it in any thead.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for election. I am HE not she/it. To find debunkers is easy

for me. I am wrong. OK Iam right ---don't care. You have a problems

---many,many....Give a free speech to talibans & co---YOU love them

Originally posted by Chuck Stevenson
Off on a tangent - sorry.

One of the most interesting and suddenly useful items I noticed is that under the posters names
there appears an item called "Ignore this user".
I elect to use it on chapo as I have yet see anything of real contribution by him/her/it in any thead.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for election. I am HE not she/it. To find debunkers is easy

for me. I am wrong. OK Iam right ---don't care. You have a problems

---many,many....Give a free speech to talibans & co---YOU love them