• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Nice question dodger

Forums New posts
L

Leeham

Paranormal Novice
Just listened to the latest episode with James Moseley, my highlight was when David asked (in reference to the Roswell I-beam patterns) "Where can we see a sample of these patterns?", Mosely had just previously said that the patterns were found in some shop...after this question he just ignored it completely and started talking about other things.

For me this throws everything else out the window, it was a simple question.
 
Leeham said:
Just listened to the latest episode with James Moseley, my highlight was when David asked (in reference to the Roswell I-beam patterns) "Where can we see a sample of these patterns?", Mosely had just previously said that the patterns were found in some shop...after this question he just ignored it completely and started talking about other things.

For me this throws everything else out the window, it was a simple question.
Click to expand...

Not really. Jim isn't the sort of person who does deep research on these things. He reads an awful lot and does evaluate different ideas, but you can't ask him to provide detailed evidence beyond the reference to where he got the information.

So a question of this sort would not yield the results you or I might hope for.

You take Jim for what he is. :D
 
That's fair enough, he appeared to have a good understanding of what he was saying up to this point, but when David threw that question up he didn't even acknowledge it.
 
I don't know if there are images of the tape, but Moore talks about it in his chapter in UFO Crash at Roswell: Genesis of a Modern Myth. (Benson, Saler, Moore 1997).

Maybe he is misremembering or lying, but that is the source Moseley is coming from. Moore says the tape was surplus gift/novelty tape used in the construction of the Mogul apparatus.
 
There was a Roswell show on either the History Channel or Discovery (over here in the Netherlands) a couple of weeks ago and they interviewed a guy who had worked on Mogul. He stated that they used ordinary sticky tape which happened to include some fancy symbols in order to strengthen the struts of the device. I wish I could remember more details (I appreciate it's annoyingly vague!) but I deleted it from the DVR after I watched it. Have to say, seemed fairly convincing to me. Perhaps someone else saw it too?
 
Gene Steinberg said:
You take Jim for what he is. :D
Click to expand...

A luddite? :p

For me this tape explaination has always seemed very fishy. Why would a military contract in Nevada need to use surplus tape from a gift shop in New York to make something as straightforward as radar reflectors?

But then again most of the Roswell stuff is so mired in murky muck, who knows what's what anymore...
 
While I have a number of issues with the Roswell case, it's pretty clear to me that something odd came down, and I somehow doubt it was a balloon... but yeah, there's been too much time between the incident and now, and too many opportunities to muddy the water.

dB
 
CapnG said:
For me this tape explaination has always seemed very fishy. Why would a military contract in Nevada need to use surplus tape from a gift shop in New York to make something as straightforward as radar reflectors?
Click to expand...

New York isn't so surprising since the team was from NYU, and the early tests were in Pennsylvania, suggesting at least some of the material was produced in New York itself.

http://csicop.org/si/9507/roswell.html

Again, the context is an eyewitness testimony, recorded decades later, so that is what it is.
 
The problem with Roswell is that it's become a sort of "anchor point" for much of what we consider ufology today. Many people will cite Rosewell in their own accounts as a factual crash of an alien craft (note to David: I'm using the term "alien" here in it's dictionary form ie: something of unknown origin) which means that it's become a house of cards. If Roswell really was nothing more than a top secret weather balloon project then alot (and I mean ALOT) of otherwise credible testimony goes in the toilet.

On the other hand, if only ONE aspect of the Roswell incident pans out then it represents possibly the single most important event in history. It's all very binary.
 
My issue with James is that he doesn't do any research. From my understanding of the interview is that he takes other peoples work and just forms an opinion from that.

As far as Roswell goes , I could care less if I hear anything ever again about it. I'm tired of all of these shows drudging up the same crap over and over again. ( by shows I mean tv shows and not the Paracast). UFO hunters, all the history channel and Nat Geo shows are all the same. Same talk same conclusions, nobody knows dick, but everyone is an expert.
 
Mothra said:
My issue with James is that he doesn't do any research.
Click to expand...

He doesn't do research as much as he chronicles. As he talks about in his book, as a young college dropout (he came into an inheritance) in the early 1950s, he travelled around with the intention of writing a research book on flying saucers. But within a year, he decided that the subject of real interest to him was the people involved with flying saucers, and not the question itself. And so he started what became Saucer Smear.

Really, he's not a researcher into the UFO questions, he is a historian of the UFO/Contactee/Saucerian subculture. Which is why he's being succeeded by an anthropologist.
 
macavity said:
There was a Roswell show on either the History Channel or Discovery (over here in the Netherlands) a couple of weeks ago and they interviewed a guy who had worked on Mogul. He stated that they used ordinary sticky tape which happened to include some fancy symbols in order to strengthen the struts of the device. I wish I could remember more details (I appreciate it's annoyingly vague!) but I deleted it from the DVR after I watched it. Have to say, seemed fairly convincing to me. Perhaps someone else saw it too?
Click to expand...

I remember seeing the show. As I recall, the tape was apparently leftover holiday themed scotch-type tape with a pattern of flowers, etc. printed along the tape. According to the show, this pattern managed to somehow be transferred onto the "I-beams." This debunking was presented in a convincing way, however I agree with CapnG: Why would the military or a contractor on a classified Mogul project be using holiday tape?

-todd.
 
Mothra said:
My issue with James is that he doesn't do any research. From my understanding of the interview is that he takes other peoples work and just forms an opinion from that.

As far as Roswell goes , I could care less if I hear anything ever again about it. I'm tired of all of these shows drudging up the same crap over and over again. ( by shows I mean tv shows and not the Paracast). UFO hunters, all the history channel and Nat Geo shows are all the same. Same talk same conclusions, nobody knows dick, but everyone is an expert.
Click to expand...

That's called "empirical research" - looking at other works and making your own conclusions. All I know is it is widely accepted in linguistic studies :)
 
Back
Top