Roswell: A Red Herring?

The GUT

gort51
Did'nt the Other Roswell thread have evidence that Brazel was forced by the military to change his story from Crashed saucer and "They're Not Green" dead little men to, bits of sticks, foil and Christmas tape?.

What is the evidence for that evidence then? Brazel was pretty clear very early on: Sticks, foil, rubber.

edit on 8-11-2013 by The GUT because: (no reason given)

Apparently the evidence is in the "Roswell newspaper" of the time, and a statement by the "Newsman/Radio jock Journo guy" that interviewed him at the time, then got to Re-interview him with the "Real" (Military) story 1-2 days later, retracting his first interview information.

I guess you would be pretty clear on things too, if someone was holding a gun to your head (figuratively speaking of course).
Apparently, like all the other witnesses have stated, he was threatened to keep his mouth shut or else, by the military.

As per, The other "Roswell thread about the novel with the interviews" tells us.

Look up the thread and read it for yourself, I think its up to 10 pages or so now. Has a copy of the Newspaper article etc.

Me...I dont know if its real or not, I wasnt there....

reply to post by The GUT


Dear The Gut

I go this way especially with Roswell.

I look at the undeniable facts and make a possible faith judgment from them.

As regards Roswell, I come up with they are still lying all these years on. Something very extraordinary happened there at that time.

Having established that clearly in my own mind, one has to ask why they are still lying.

My conclusion to that is that the truth can never be told if the world is to continue turning as it has done all these years.

People who in my opinion keep on harping on about disclosure without giving much thought as to what that would mean.

In my opinion it would mean the end of this civilization as we know it. Therefore Roswell and the truth will probably never be on the same page.

My best guess is that the head lines on the 8th of July 1947 where most likely the truth.

reply to post by MAC269


The only problem with the possible biggest cover up in the world is "Two men may keep a secret if 1 of them is dead". Something happened there but the real facts are undiscoverable from here. Too much hearsay and conflicting responses.Actually it's the conflicting responses that give it the ring of plausibility but not enough solid facts to make it an absolute.
To pretend we know enough about the universe to exclude the possibility of ET is a real leap. The problem with the UFO reports is the complete lack of physical evidence. Could they be inter-dimensional observers with absolutely no true physical presence here?
All hot air with no real facts. Just like the Roswell rumors.

reply to post by The GUT


I have also read much on Roswell being disputed in literature and in films, not just stuff promoting the incident as genuine, so I feel I have enough info from both sides to form an opinion..

Plus the humungous counter intelligence campaign against alien visitation and non human technology has been so powerfully incorporated into our culture, plus the number of people murdered and silenced, and ridiculed and having their careers ruined for speaking, even about Roswell..

I remember making the decision to believe it because of what I had seen and read, but I can't remember specifics very well without digging through the books, many of which I would have to re-purchase to be able to refresh my memory, so alas, I can't grace the thread with specific claims...

It's old age and memory rather than poor research on my part. Sorry I couldn't be more forthcoming with specific claims that I have read about.. The information I am going by to make the claims I am making is all in the public domain though, so I don't feel that what I am saying about Roswell is unrealistic by any means.

There are also the reports of how the debris was very exotic, i.e., wood similar to balsa in appearance, but impervious to breaking or cutting or burning. (granted it broke when crashing to earth) .. I agree that knowing with any degree of certainty is limited to complete faith in testimony, whether it be for or against..



Edit:

PS, thanks TG, I never felt you were being unreasonable in any way, I've enjoyed discussing this by the way..
For some reason, I have a feeling that one of these days, someone will really blow the whistle on this case..
In a big way I hope..

Cheers

signalfire

The GUT

signalfire
If you want to know how useless Wikipedia is information-wise, just compare their discussion of Lloyd Pye's Starchild Skull with the website itself. All attempts at correcting the record have met with instantaneous coverups and lies. One wonders who actually has access to Wikipedia and what their agenda is, but it's not the truth.

Starchild Skull site

Wiki page

Are you saying the following quote wasn't good?

Brazel told the Roswell Daily Record that he and his son saw a "large area of bright wreckage made up of rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks."[2] He paid little attention to it but returned on July 4 with his son, wife and daughter to gather up the material.

en.wikipedia.org...

Although, ahem, I'll take your word for it that the Starchild site is an unimpeachable and balanced source of information, it has zero to do with this topic, correct?

It's that kind of changing of the subject and ignoring of the facts that we are talking about here. It's not conducive to honest research and is more suited to shoring up one's unsupported opinions and obfuscating the honest search for truth wherever it may lead.

edit on 8-11-2013 by The GUT because: (no reason given)

I wasn't changing the subject, I was demonstrating (for anyone who wants to bother reading both the Starchild Skull site and the Wiki entry on it) that Wikipedia can't be trusted as a source as they appear to have a debunking agenda. Many attempts have been made to correct it and they are all erased.

I've seen many other descriptions of the Roswell crash debris that were far more detailed and anomalous, including claims that the debris field was over a 100 feet across and 3/4 of a mile long and that the initial sampling taken filled a pickup truck and didn't make the tiniest dent in the amount of debris left over... Must have been some weather balloon...

Yeah, that's the part that always got me too. The original witnesses said that the debris field was so vast and they were only able to collect a small sample of it. And also reports that the main disc was found some distance away from the debris. But over time I have come to the conclusion that it is all disinformation. I can't even go into all the stuff that has led me to this conclusion. I don't say this lightly, I have been looking into this case for almost as long as Stan F. himself (who may or may not be a disinfo agent himself). I used to think he was one of the best investigators out there but now I can't name anyone that I would look to for any kind of truth on the subject.

reply to post by alienreality

I respect you and enjoy your posts here AR. I'm just being challenging and feisty on this thread to make a point. I also truly understand about having read enough to form one's own opinion but not being able to source on demand.

No hard feelings I hope. I was kind of waiting until the thread had run its course to make fun of some of my own far out opinions, too.

My goal here was to try and point out that ufology seems stuck in the ruts of the past. Ruts that seem questionable and seem to all too often define the field. Are we chasing myths instead of enigma? Have we actually fallen victim to government disinformation of another sort? I believe so.

I keep seeing folk say stuff like, "Oh yeah, what about Roswell" as a response and I just don't think that does us any good and I personally have truly come to the opinion stated here. Things seem to have gotten stale on the UFO forum ya' know? Belief seems rampant while research seems slack.

Just figured I'd let off some steam and shake things up a bit at the same time.

reply to post by datasdream


Dear datasdream

From datasdream : (All hot air with no real facts. Just like the Roswell rumors.)

Yep that is why I do not go with anything other than undisputable fact.

One being that for sure they meaning TPTB have lied about it at least twice possibly three times.

Captured a flying disk

Weather Balloon

Project Mogul

Two of which are for certain untrue. Maybe three.
----------------
Captured a flying disk. He did not say that they had scraped up some crap of the desert floor. For sure there was more to the story right there and then for him to come to that conclusion.

Blanchard the commander who ordered the press release ended up a 4 star general. The 509th was the most elite of its type in the world at that time being the only one with atomic weapons, in the world. Not Dummies.

Also bare in mind this was the third event of this type in three weeks or so. Starting with Kenneth Arnold in June.

The GUT

I also truly understand about having read enough to form one's own opinion but not being able to source on demand.

I used to provide lots of sources, but if they are not good enough for the hardcore skeptics, then what is the point? Show me this, and then hahahaha are you kidding? Billy Meir is a con artist, steven greier is a con artist, john lear is dellusional, bob lazar never worked at s-4 or finished any university with a physics degree, phil schneider is spreading misinformation, thomas castello is a fictional character, but all the debunkers are real and trustworthy because my school teacher and neighbors think so?

My goal here was to try and point out that ufology seems stuck in the ruts of the past. Ruts that seem questionable and seem to all too often define the field. Are we chasing myths instead of enigma? Have we actually fallen victim to government disinformation of another sort? I believe so.

I think we have fallen victim to the james oberg, phil platt, carl sagan pseudo-debunkers.

If everything worthwhile is classified and an occasional leak is called a hoax, then all we are left is with faith and hearsay. I choose to believe most of the myths, at least those with any credibility that are not on youtube to make fun of the topic.

I keep seeing folk say stuff like, "Oh yeah, what about Roswell" as a response and I just don't think that does us any good and I personally have truly come to the opinion stated here. Things seem to have gotten stale on the UFO forum ya' know? Belief seems rampant while research seems slack.

Just figured I'd let off some steam and shake things up a bit at the same time.

edit on 8-11-2013 by The GUT because: (no reason given)

I used to post often on this forumn but got tired of the pointless arguing. Its not like we can prove anything to be 100% true or false.

reply to post by The GUT

Belief seems rampant while research seems slack.

Brother you said a mouthful there; that one sentence
describes a large quantity of all human mental
activity.

How in heck is the average person supposed to do
genuine UFO research?

KPB

KellyPrettyBear
Brother you said a mouthful there; that one sentence
describes a large quantity of all human mental
activity.

How in heck is the average person supposed to do
genuine UFO research?

KPB

Excellent point. Sometimes all we can do is take out the trash I guess. Does it get us any closer? Maybe not...but doesn't the room smell nice haha.

reply to post by KellyPrettyBear


Don't you need something to form a belief on, or do you form it on hot air?

People examine the evidence and form their opinions. Bias plays a big part in everything. Even in politics people can form vastly different opinions on mundane things. This is not strange. People are not alike.

And I forgot richard hoageland who's book "nasa:dark mission" was somehow a new york times bestseller a few years ago. He was discussing monuments on the moon and mars. Loved his book! Phil Platt and James Oberg tried to debunk him, but he actually debunked them.

Anyone that is interested can visit www.enterprisemission.com

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by KellyPrettyBear

 

Don't you need something to form a belief on, or do you form it on hot air?

People examine the evidence and form their opinions. Bias plays a big part in everything. Even in politics people can form vastly different opinions on mundane things. This is not strange. People are not alike.

When it comes to subjects that can't possibly be proven
one way or the other --- it's pure hot air. The tiny scraps
of so called evidence are often too insignificant to matter.

The human mind is desperate to generate answers, to
generate certainty.. so that we can feel secure.. which
is required to feel happy.

So we have three choices:

1) Be happy without examining the big issues.. a few people can do this.
2) Lie to ourselves to feel secure - this is the role of religion and spirituality,
alternate anthropology, etc.
3) Be totally honest with ourselves. This is a path that a FEW scientists, and
a few uuummm "psychic explorers of the human condition" take.

To tie this into the thread though.. to have even a CHANCE of making a
contribution on such a fringe subject (due to lack of good evidence and "noise"
from culture and the Internet) such as UFO's / conspiracies / meaning of life
stuff ... you would need to take door #3 - the door hardly ever taken.
Then bust your ass for decades.

Since you asked..

KPB

reply to post by KellyPrettyBear


Have you watched ancient aliens on history channel? That is exactly what some people have been doing...busting their arse for decades, because mainstream scientists either dont care or fear the consequences too much.

It ties it all nicely. No one has all the answers, but they sure do come close.

If you keep looking at the trees and splitting hairs you will not accomplish much. This is the problem with perpetual skeptics imho. They get caught up in the details, especially on the credibility issue, and ignore the meat and potatoes.

reply to post by Krakatoa


Roswell should be considered a model of how NOT to conduct a serious UFO inquiry. For all the reasons Krakatoa stated....and the *context* of the time and place, there is simply nothing there.

False Alert!

reply to post by The GUT


I have always had high doubts that any military back then or even now would be capable of taking down a craft from another star system or dimension... It goes without saying that for the craft to be capable of getting here, it would have gone through much more rigorous exposure than a few missiles and a bad lightning storm. Do I *know*? Of course not, but that's always been my instinct on Roswell.

I think it is hilarious, Area 51... People see strange lights over a military base. What do they do? They scream that the U.F.Os are piloted by otherworldly beings.

I want to talk about technology here.

Military prototypes. If I was the government, especially cold war government, I would have a special branch of people to instigate a pop culture of UFOs to distract from any top secret technologies.

God forbid the world finds out they have been utilizing anything other than the internal combustion system.

When I saw my first impressive UFO, it was a very personal experience which changed me forever. It altered my perspective on everything that had to do with our reality. Think of that technology... And how it could save this planet. The otherworldly beings or black ops pilots can hang out too, but I want that technology put to use.

The way I see it is: the three Amigos are = Food distribution, energy technology, and medical resources. Along with redesigning cities to harbor more people comfortably--- we're looking at the end to overpopulation.

But of course we have always had a few wealthy families to clamp down on this ever happening.

Rest in peace Tesla, one day your dream will come true.

reply to post by smurfy


The fact that according to some all the cloaked mysteries that's even being acknowledged by corporations within the same organization ,have never happened and that we all suffer from disillusion is ridiculous.

Ahhh some are born with winkers and probably wear them for life...

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by KellyPrettyBear

 

Have you watched ancient aliens on history channel? That is exactly what some people have been doing...busting their arse for decades, because mainstream scientists either dont care or fear the consequences too much.

It ties it all nicely. No one has all the answers, but they sure do come close.

If you keep looking at the trees and splitting hairs you will not accomplish much. This is the problem with perpetual skeptics imho. They get caught up in the details, especially on the credibility issue, and ignore the meat and potatoes.

Have you ever watched the credits after "Ancient Aliens" ?
It's produced by Promethius Entertainment; not some
global consortium of scholars!

KellyPrettyBear

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by KellyPrettyBear

 

Have you watched ancient aliens on history channel? That is exactly what some people have been doing...busting their arse for decades, because mainstream scientists either dont care or fear the consequences too much.

It ties it all nicely. No one has all the answers, but they sure do come close.

If you keep looking at the trees and splitting hairs you will not accomplish much. This is the problem with perpetual skeptics imho. They get caught up in the details, especially on the credibility issue, and ignore the meat and potatoes.

Have you ever watched the credits after "Ancient Aliens" ?
It's produced by Promethius Entertainment; not some
global consortium of scholars!

Who are the speakers on that show? Have you looked into their credentials? All college graduates for the most part and some even have doctorate degrees in their respective field. I couldn't care less who produced the series.

EarthCitizen07

KellyPrettyBear

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by KellyPrettyBear

 

Have you watched ancient aliens on history channel? That is exactly what some people have been doing...busting their arse for decades, because mainstream scientists either dont care or fear the consequences too much.

It ties it all nicely. No one has all the answers, but they sure do come close.

If you keep looking at the trees and splitting hairs you will not accomplish much. This is the problem with perpetual skeptics imho. They get caught up in the details, especially on the credibility issue, and ignore the meat and potatoes.

Have you ever watched the credits after "Ancient Aliens" ?
It's produced by Promethius Entertainment; not some
global consortium of scholars!

Who are the speakers on that show? Have you looked into their credentials? All college graduates for the most part and some even have doctorate degrees in their respective field. I couldn't care less who produced the series.

One of your scholars

The primary presenter on the show, who uses his own knowledge
and opinions as much as anyone, has a "scholarly degree" in
sports information and communication.

Do you really want to have this conversation? Perhaps you might research the
actual credentials of the individuals involved and report back to us?

KPB