Board Logo
« Roswell question. »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Oct 20th, 2017, 10:13pm


Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

*Totally FREE 24/7 Access *Your Nickname and Avatar *Private Messages

*Join today and be a part of one of the largest UFO sites on the Net.


« Previous Topic | Next Topic »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  ...  9 Notify Send Topic Print
 veryhotthread  Author  Topic: Roswell question.  (Read 20498 times)
HAL9000
Guest
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #30 on: Oct 27th, 2011, 1:14pm »

Icepick.

It was the three pale white balls of light in an equilateral triangle formation that I saw. This was the thing that started of my interest.

GForce,

I also think that the Roswell story has reached it's best-by date. It's so far back and so confused that no definitive 'facts' can be extracted from it.
It is also a bad entry-level story for newbies. They aught to begin somewhere in the eighties and leave the old stories to fade away.

HAL
User IP Logged

GForce
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

You'll never find happiness until you find yourself!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6396
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #31 on: Oct 27th, 2011, 3:08pm »

on Oct 27th, 2011, 1:14pm, HAL9000 wrote:
Icepick.

It was the three pale white balls of light in an equilateral triangle formation that I saw. This was the thing that started of my interest.

GForce,

I also think that the Roswell story has reached it's best-by date. It's so far back and so confused that no definitive 'facts' can be extracted from it.
It is also a bad entry-level story for newbies. They aught to begin somewhere in the eighties and leave the old stories to fade away.

HAL


Hal I agree and disagree with you. Part of the lure toward Roswell is the lore. The History Channel to UFO Hunters continue to have shows devoted to it. Granted most of the evidence is dated and all the shows do is spin it but there's still interest there. And as I said in response to icepick the evidence is still out there or in there. The evidence and paper work is stored somewhere and hopefully someday will be released. In that regard I've kept the door open on the case.

Hal, I do agree with you that newbies should look into newer cases. Most actually do. I think shows like UFO Hunters cast a light on many things from near collusions from planes to topics like the Phoenix Lights. I think that generates interest. We get new members here everyday. Some of the newbies have their own sightings or encounters and are simply looking for a medium to tell their story or hear stories from like minded people.

BTW Hal, I do enjoy your insights on topics same with icepick. I may not always agree but both of you make interesting arguments! Dan
User IP Logged

icepick
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 5931
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #32 on: Oct 27th, 2011, 8:17pm »

on Oct 27th, 2011, 12:48pm, GForce wrote:
I disagree with you Tim on several fronts. First off I would like to know more. I certainly don't think I know enough. I also know that somewhere lies the evidence taken at Roswell. It may be tucked away in the bowels of some military base but as long as it exists and I think it still does there's always a chance of it being brought forward.

I also think it's good to rehash and keep alive the story. Many newbies to the UFO community start with the story of Roswell. It's often the story that lights the fire or turns the light on for folks. It makes them ask questions, seek answers. That's what's needed! Because under a pile of stored papers, packed away in boxes lie answers. Maybe a UFOlogists working in the military comes across them and releases them.

While I remain skeptical of exactly what crashed at Roswell I still want answers...evidence. While I agree it's history I will add history should not be forgotten but taught and passed on to future generations. My two cents! Dan


And you are entitled to that opinion Dan. Did I say I don't want to know what crashed at Roswell? I would love to.

In my case, I just suspect it was top secret military, and has been so deeply buried the truth may no longer be available. A result of that cover up syndrome Bonehead mentioned. Seeing as how opinions won't change without evidence, the only good we will probably get from Roswell is a reminder to pounce if we see the same syndrome in the future. Remember, not rehash, that's my take here. Always remember.

Take care
Tim
User IP Logged

icepick
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 5931
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #33 on: Oct 27th, 2011, 8:26pm »

on Oct 27th, 2011, 1:14pm, HAL9000 wrote:
Icepick.

It was the three pale white balls of light in an equilateral triangle formation that I saw. This was the thing that started of my interest.

GForce,

I also think that the Roswell story has reached it's best-by date. It's so far back and so confused that no definitive 'facts' can be extracted from it.
It is also a bad entry-level story for newbies. They aught to begin somewhere in the eighties and leave the old stories to fade away.

HAL


Ah, the triangles. I think we will be seeing more of them, much more.

I do Agree with Dan that Roswell is an attention grabber, but yes, the story is archaic. However, keep in mind that I believe something even older would be highly beneficial in this arena, gun camera footage of the Foo Fighters. Some of us requested that under the FOIA recently, and received an invalid request. Why? It's more than half a century old.

Now my interest is really piqued. What is on that footage?
User IP Logged

GForce
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

You'll never find happiness until you find yourself!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6396
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #34 on: Oct 27th, 2011, 8:33pm »

Tim, I suspect as well it might have been a top secret project. I knew a test pilot now deceased who was an instructor for Top Gun. He retired in 1976 and said when I met him that we had aircraft that was far more advanced than what the public knew. He said at the time it was 30-50 years advanced of public knowledge. So a top secret project could be the reason for the cover-up. Dan
User IP Logged

icepick
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 5931
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #35 on: Oct 27th, 2011, 8:44pm »

From an ongoing program? That's what I suspect as well. I'm sure we possess things that most don't dream of. And it all probably got started when we mixed those Nazi Scientists with ours in White Sands. There were some brilliant minds there.
User IP Logged

beeleaver66
Senior Member
ImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 477
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #36 on: Oct 27th, 2011, 11:11pm »

It is certainly an interesting opinion that the Nazi Scientists the US govt had at White Sands had something to do with Roswell. We are talking two years after the end of WWII. They were only still just developing Rocket technology. Rocket fuel means incendiary type crashes, there is no mention of burning at the crash site(s), is there? Nor is there much left from a crashed V2 type Rocket. Speculation is all we have. I just dont see how this points to Military testing. The Military at the time didnt recognize the debris? The Intelligence officer (s) of an Atomic Bomber Squadron couldnt identify the wreckage? that perplexes me. Nothing we had back then was so extra-ordinary that it couldnt have been identified as terrestrial. Is that a fair statement? So why then would the Military Intelligence people not have realized this was terrestrial? Jesse Marcels Jr. is the best witness we have, nothing archaic about his testimony.
User IP Logged

icepick
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 5931
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #37 on: Oct 28th, 2011, 12:04am »

First of all Beeleaver, wreckage? Not many people got to examine that. Maybe a couple at best, save those who picked it up.

That famous newspaper photograph? Uh-uh. You can forget that one, it was obviously a balloon, and probably staged. It's my guess that the government really did try to disclose on Roswell the last time, but screwed up and used that photograph as a guide. All of the official people involved have long since retired, and are probably dead. I'm sure you're hip to government records? Well the real ones were undoubtedly taken out of the loop and false ones inserted, leaving no possible paper trail. Today the true records would be hopelessly buried, because there's nobody left alive who knows what closet to look for the skeleton in. Provided they didn't feed it to something of course.

The V2? Come on, you know better than that. Von Braun and his team were not the only scientists brought over, they were just the poster children. Even back then the government admitted to more than a thousand, but in recent times it came out that tens of thousands of researchers were rounded up and granted immunity in Operation Paper Clip. Rockets were but one of many different areas they were researching. They were also responsible for the jet, developing an atomic bomb, as well as a multitude of vertical take off programs, remember? Had their most brilliant scientists not been Jewish, and bailed early in the 1930s, WWII might have been a far more difficult conflict. Since they were forced to abandon their nuclear program a considerable time before the war was over when they lost their heavy water facility in Norway, one has to wonder what the 'wonder weapons' Hitler was counting on were. He lost his mind after Normandy showed him the Allies were unstoppable. Before that he was simply somebody who lacked any knowledge of military strategy, as well as a zealous despot. Had the French not set things in motion with those horrendous conditions at the end of WWI, he probably would never have come to power.

But to sell them short on scientific accomplishments is inherently false. Everybody marvels at what was publicly known at the time. But make no mistakes about it. When the war was over, their best kept secrets in military research became our best kept secrets. Would we have initiated something as far reaching as Paper Clip for rocket technology? No. We would have taken Werner and company in because they were ahead of us, but that's all. Remember, we had people involved in the same type of research. Paper Clip cost tens of millions in 1944 dollars. Whatever they were after was very substantial.Something we knew nothing about, and weren't willing to let fall into Soviet hands. Stalin may have been worse than Hitler, killing roughly fifty million Russians in his purges like that.

When you referred to many people examining the wreckage, you stepped right in the middle of the problem with Roswell. No, not the fact that if you thought about that allegation you would realize it's most likely false, but the fact that not one single bit of what we have can be considered proof. We know that something crashed, period. End of story. Beyond that it's just endless heresay, much of which conflicts with other parts of the story. The government did one very good job of burying the facts on this one. So good it's doubtful the truth will ever come out.

Just don't sell the Nazis short. Remember, where they went in South America became a UFO hotspot as well. In my opinion that lends all kinds of credibility to the concept that they contributed to part of the UFO phenomenon. Part, but not all.
User IP Logged

GForce
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

You'll never find happiness until you find yourself!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6396
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #38 on: Oct 28th, 2011, 08:26am »

Tim, you bring up an interesting point about the German scientists. It's known that Germany was in fact working on disc shaped craft shortly before the war ended. It is possible that what crashed at Roswell was a proto-type. The History Channel had a special on Hitler's interest with UFO's and the occult.
User IP Logged

bonehead
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

"All descriptions of reality are temporary hypotheses."


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1659
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #39 on: Oct 28th, 2011, 10:57am »

on Oct 27th, 2011, 12:38am, icepick wrote:
I'm with you. I want to see something solid.


Hhhhmm. Then you better stop looking at UFOs. There is no "solid" evidence. All there is are witness statements, rumors, innuendos, circumstantial evidence (that indicates something - but never tells us "what"), photos and videos (all of which are in dispute) and large piles of speculation (mostly uninformed).

But as I said before, if you want witness accounts, the Roswell case is the "big daddy" of them all. Renedlesham (or any other case of that matter) doesn't come anywhere close to that.

So, you are simply believing what you are willing to believe and discounting other cases for subjective and arbitrary reasons having nothing at all to do with "solid evidence". You are only chasing phantoms with phantom "logic".

In the 64 years since Kenneth Arnold's sighting, not single shred of irrefutable "hard" UFO evidence has emerged. Your religious faith is duly noted. My guess is, after 64 years of nothing, that your "solid evidence" will not be forthcoming......

User Image

All hail the religious Totem! shocked
grin

on Oct 27th, 2011, 11:11pm, beeleaver66 wrote:
The Military at the time didnt recognize the debris? The Intelligence officer (s) of an Atomic Bomber Squadron couldnt identify the wreckage? that perplexes me. Nothing we had back then was so extra-ordinary that it couldnt have been identified as terrestrial. Is that a fair statement?


Yes, that is a fair statement. If what was reported was not so unusual, then nobody would have been claiming "crashed discs". You either believe the testimonials or you don't. To disbelieve them, you have to believe that dozens of witnesses were telling similar lies. shocked

Now, if you want to talk about a truly steep evidentiary climb......


on Oct 27th, 2011, 11:11pm, beeleaver66 wrote:
So why then would the Military Intelligence people not have realized this was terrestrial? Jesse Marcels Jr. is the best witness we have, nothing archaic about his testimony.


Jesse Jr. is still alive and personally handled some of the wreckage. I suggest you read his book (or talk to the man himself if you must). Not a great read, but from an evidentiary standpoint, pretty much as good as anything gets in the UFO field.

Your mirage is waiting sir!
wink
« Last Edit: Oct 28th, 2011, 12:33pm by bonehead » User IP Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible."
ALBERT EINSTEIN
icepick
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 5931
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #40 on: Oct 28th, 2011, 7:26pm »

on Oct 28th, 2011, 08:26am, GForce wrote:
Tim, you bring up an interesting point about the German scientists. It's known that Germany was in fact working on disc shaped craft shortly before the war ended. It is possible that what crashed at Roswell was a proto-type. The History Channel had a special on Hitler's interest with UFO's and the occult.


Yes, especially the occult. Hard to say who Hitler may have been had he not endured that brain scramble called WWI. Combat does things to you in the realm of revelation. Those who can't deal with seem to lose it for some reason.

The Nazis were working on many things I've read about. Some exotic, and the reports have the ring of truth. Flying disks were among these. But some reports are bizarre, and I just don't know. Like extra dimensional travel for example. The latter causes me concern, because if true, that research came here. Careful what you wish for?
« Last Edit: Oct 28th, 2011, 7:27pm by icepick » User IP Logged

icepick
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 5931
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #41 on: Oct 28th, 2011, 7:39pm »

Bonehead;

Sometimes your cynicism gets the best of you. I try to keep up with the UFO world because I believe there are others in addition to ours. I had thought you were aware of that.

Illusion? Does Marcels have some wreckage for me to examine? If not, this is just more heresay. He was just a child then, but older than I now. I am known for a lucid memory, and yes I do remember much of my childhood well. Even a view outside my window while still in my crib. But childhood photos tell me that even my most vivid childhood memories are not as accurate as I once believed.
User IP Logged

beeleaver66
Senior Member
ImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 477
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #42 on: Oct 28th, 2011, 10:16pm »

on Oct 28th, 2011, 12:04am, icepick wrote:
First of all Beeleaver, wreckage? Not many people got to examine that. Maybe a couple at best, save those who picked it up.

icepick
Not sure if you are familiar with this site, but it seems to show at least a dozen people who have signed affidavits that they handled the debris, I suppose you will say these folks are liars, or their memory about handling something from off world, could fade in their psyches.
http://www.roswellproof.com/index.html

I guess one could opine in that direction. Do the motivations of these witnesses speak to you at all? Does the fact that death bed testimonies have been received>? that seems fairly serious to me, that an old, honorable vet is dying and wants to get something off his chest. You'd think that the last thing one would be thinking about on their deathbed, is aliens and crashed spacecraft. I'm just saying.

@Bone perhaps not with Roswell, but are there not other forms of evidence, but that we either cant or choose not to recognize? I agree the "solid" form of proof may not be forthcoming, but what is solid to us may be something entirely different elsewhere in the Galaxy. n'est-ce pas?
beeleaver
« Last Edit: Oct 28th, 2011, 10:17pm by beeleaver66 » User IP Logged

icepick
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 5931
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #43 on: Oct 29th, 2011, 01:38am »

Beeleaver;

As a response let me point a couple of things out. Well, maybe more:

If you have noticed, you should realize that when I believe a report to be false, it is never one of the standard debunks that convinced me. I always follow my own observations. While true investigation has shown some reports to be false, debunkers never have more to offer than believers do in this case, opinion.

I once tried hard to believe many of the Roswell accounts, but the case won't let me. For one, many of these contradict another. Not to say they are lying, rather that it probably shows what time does to memory. For another, no matter how credible the witness, testimony does not equate to proof without evidence to back it up.

You should know from many of my posts that I do believe many reports. Even some of the more fantastic ones. Sometimes one's subconscious screams truth. I listen to my gut. In matters where proof is available, it has never failed me.

You should also realize I don't dismiss anything out of hand, only with reason. Even Bigfoot reports, despite having never seen anything to support it, after living about forty years of outdoor life in Bigfoot central. I know the standard disclaimer to be false, things do vanish forever in dense forests. Including people. In 1990 a wrecked WWII fighter was found 1/4 mile off the end of a runway west of here. A logger falling timber found it. They searched for it for days when it was lost, and they knew it was on approach. Our forest is bona fide triple canopy with undergrowth here. I do see where such a creature could exist. Just don't show me that monkey suit video making the rounds on youtube, okay? I know a human gait when I see it and that video ...... well it's not the Patterson Film. I wouldn't be surprised if Sasquatch were found.

I could go on, but it would get repetitive. I only responded strongly because you used a denial I know you realized was wrong. Making light of Nazi research. In other threads you have indicated you're aware of some of the strange research they were into. And this should concern you, because that research came here at war's end.

I'm not trying to change your mind, only state my belief and why I have it. In this case that won't change until I see something above and beyond what we know now. A document from government archives that isn't obviously scanned might do it, it all depends. You can Photoshop documents too after all.

You might find my views on this case strange, because I'm always so quick to point out that the one article commonly seen about it known to be genuine was staged. The picture from the original story can't be the debris in question. That is obviously a balloon, an object commonly seen by the locals around Roswell. Considering that, I can't see one of them failing to recognize it for what it was. Even the biggest hick has a working brain. Whatever the reason, that picture was staged. But that determines nothing other than the military covering the trail. Like a mother bear protecting her young.
« Last Edit: Oct 29th, 2011, 01:42am by icepick » User IP Logged

bonehead
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

"All descriptions of reality are temporary hypotheses."


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1659
xx Re: Roswell question.
« Reply #44 on: Oct 29th, 2011, 12:22pm »

Thanks Ice,

Okay, I will step away from the vitriol. I have to admit that I do not understand your position at all. Your objections to this case are pretty arbitrary and unconvincing from where i stand. You want hard proofs for Roswell. There aren't any available to us. All we have are witness statements - dozens of them.

No other case extant has so many witnesses. Yes, their stories diverge somewhat, but it is also clear that different individuals and groups were involved in different aspects of the discovery, recovery and "clean-up" of the site and the subsequent travels of wreckage and bodies. Rather than being a "problem" I find that these various different points of view point to an ongoing and complex operation that unfolded over time.

No other cases have this kind of corroboration. As for "hard evidence": well, what cases actually have that? For Roswell, there are the recent tiny wads of foil. Pretty bad, in my opinion. They do not have to properties so frequently reported by witnesses. And here is an important point: many witnesses describe the unique properties of the "memory metal". They all agree on these properties.

So, how many USAAF "secret" aircraft do you think had this kind of metal in them? How many "secret Nazi" aircraft do you think had this stuff in them? (I am an aviation historian that specializes in WWII, so you won't find it easy to BS me about this). And what about the numerous witnesses who talk of alien bodies and even one live individual? All liars too? Were they all too stupid to tell a human body (Japanese mutants according to Nick Redfern) from something stranger? Okay, I know you will never consider all of these compelling facts, well, compelling. But it is things like these that make this event unique.

I find your objections puzzling and arbitrary. Your argument seems to be that the way the cover-up unfolded holds within it some kind of "code" which telegraphs what kind of event it was. The large number of assumptions contained in this scenario seem to me to be a large series of insurmountable presumptive hurdles. They assume that the culture within the military stays consistent over decades. This assumption defies logic, to my mind, because it assumes that the culture within certain echelons will remain consistent despite steady turn over of personnel, culture and motives of individuals and "groups" within that system over decades. I truly do not understand how you can believe such a thing. I think inconsistency would be expected, especially since the presumed evidence would have to be beyond top secret and subject to excessive compartmentalization and "need to know" protocols.

I have a much easier time believing in the testimonials of dozens of witnesses, many of them confessed on their death-beds. As Beeleaver pointed out, people are unlikely to tell tall tales on their death-beds. That generally is the time for truth and confession. They do not get any do-overs. But you imply that they are all liars or mistaken. How many lies will you tell on your death bed (given the opportunity)?

I know which logical hurdles are easiest to overcome here. You go ahead with your strenuous logical pole vaulting. I suggest there is an easier way......

Cheers!! smiley grin

Bonehead

User IP Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible."
ALBERT EINSTEIN
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  ...  9 Notify Send Topic Print
« Previous Topic | Next Topic »

Become a member of the UFO Casebook Forum today and join our more than 19,000 members.

Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

Donate $6.99 for 50,000 Ad-Free Pageviews!

| |

This forum powered for FREE by Conforums ©
Sign up for your own Free Message Board today!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Conforums Support | Parental Controls