Some Assumptions have been bothering me

[Trajanus]

I think that the entire UFO crash mythos is ridiculous, for many reasons.

It may seem that way, but you'd have to ignore a fair amount of credible testimony from e.g. Marcel sr.

Why assume that the "bodies" recovered were biological?

Lol, a number of reports clearly give that impression e.g. stench of decomposition, blood, scavengers (which don't eat robots) and an autopsy.

It is just as likely (indeed, I would argue far more likely) that if we are dealing with extraterrestrials, they are not biological entities at all, but rather some for of robotic / cybernetic / AI "beings" - in which case, any "bodies" discovered would have been disposable

Not necessarily, especially if they cost a lot.

The inclusion of bodies would have removed any doubt that we might have had as to the nature of the craft recovered.

Honestly, there should've/would've been no doubt if the craft itself was obviously not of earthly construction.

 

[Frank Stalter]

I think that the entire UFO crash mythos is ridiculous, for many reasons.

I find it very compelling. I'm old enough to have first gotten interested in UFOs during the big flap of 73-74 and all the iconic cases of the late 40s/early 50s were recounted in vivid detail except Roswell. Apparently, there was a cryptic mention of it in a Frank Edwards book, but that was it. Why did the story vanish so completely for three decades when it was a news story at least for a moment? Even if you accept all the various USAF explanations at face value, the whole story seems to me to be great ammunition for the debunking crowd . . . . "see, even the Air Force gets carried away."

Where the truth ends and the tall tales begin is endlessly fascinating.

 

[Kieran]

Haut's affidavit suggests it was found on the 7th.



Something definitely happened, and efforts to cover up/obfuscate attest to its importance.

Brazel first claimed he found the wreckage around June 24 and later said July 4 or 6 that is very confusing when he himself can't be sure. The statement about the Flying disc having been found appeared in the newspapers on the 8th of July which was a Tuesday and the Balloon retraction story appeared in the Newspapers on the 9th of July which was a Wednesday. The original statement the 8th of July said this flying disc was recovered some time last week. This is historical record Trajanus, it can't be shoved to one side. The 7th which was a Monday couldn't have been the day they found the disc.

I Believe there was a cover up but a cover up of what nobody really know's for sure.

 

[Flatwoods]

Can someone please explain to me why this story hasn't died yet? The facts are clear; the only credible firsthand accounts from 1947(Haut affadavit nonwithstanding) concern debris found on a ranch that doesn't sound anything like a flying saucer - or any heavier-than-air craft. In fact, the debris resembled something very close to a kite, or a radar reflector.

That's it, folks: no bodies, no flying saucer, not even a single ufo sighting was associated with Roswell. Let it die already.

 

[Frank Stalter]

Can someone please explain to me why this story hasn't died yet? The facts are clear; the only credible firsthand accounts from 1947(Haut affadavit nonwithstanding) concern debris found on a ranch that doesn't sound anything like a flying saucer - or any heavier-than-air craft. In fact, the debris resembled something very close to a kite, or a radar reflector.

That's it, folks: no bodies, no flying saucer, not even a single ufo sighting was associated with Roswell. Let it die already.

If it was a kite or a balloon, how do you explain the SNAFU of releasing a press statement saying it was a flying disc? The complete disappearance of the story for 30 years afterward? The whole thing makes little sense to me but there are facts involved and they are what they are.

It's an enigma and a cornerstone for the UFO phenomenon. If true, the knowledge of alien visitation went straight to the top roughly from the beginning. If not, then everyone was well confused about the whole matter all along, but the issue was taken seriously all the way up to Truman and that is part of the historical record.

 

[Trajanus]

I find it very compelling. I'm old enough to have first gotten interested in UFOs during the big flap of 73-74

October 1973.

and all the iconic cases of the late 40s/early 50s were recounted in vivid detail except Roswell

With the exception of a few cases deemed hoaxes, like Scully's claims and Spitzbergen, the crash cases came out more or less concurrently with Roswell c late 1970s.

.

Apparently, there was a cryptic mention of it in a Frank Edwards book

Apparently? I have that book; it's in it.

Why did the story vanish so completely for three decades when it was a news story at least for a moment?

Intimidation played a part.

 

[Trajanus]

Brazel first claimed he found the wreckage around June 24 and later said July 4 or 6 that is very confusing when he himself can't be sure.

Brazel was held by the military and told what to say; ergo some of his testimony isn't reliable. As Randle pointed out, the wreckage couldn't have lain in the fields for many days prior to removal. He couldn't have tolerated that; it would've interferred with the ranch business.

The statement about the Flying disc having been found appeared in the newspapers on the 8th of July

I think the press release went out that day and papers carried the story the next day.

The original statement the 8th of July said this flying disc was recovered some time last week.

The press release isn't a reliable source of data. It mentioned a DISC being found at the ranch--contrary to the testimony of those actually there.

 

[Trajanus]

Can someone please explain to me why this story hasn't died yet? The facts are clear; the only credible firsthand accounts from 1947(Haut affadavit nonwithstanding) concern debris found on a ranch that doesn't sound anything like a flying saucer - or any heavier-than-air craft. In fact, the debris resembled something very close to a kite, or a radar reflector.

The quantity was way too much for that and the nature of the material was way too exotic for any prosaic explanation.

That's it, folks: no bodies, no flying saucer, not even a single ufo sighting was associated with Roswell. Let it die already.

A UFO was seen prior to the crash, MPs did report bodies, and an unearthly craft--possibly an escape pod.

 

[owlman]

One thing that bothers the heck out of me, and got me thinking the other day , and that is , what if ..Kenneth Arnold made the whole damn thing up , and didn't see squat out there back in '47?
His tale is truly compelling, but it is certainly not the first of its kind. Humans have apparently been depicting beings in flying machines in the sky for centuries.
If they truly are nuts n' bolts structured objects, then its highly conceivable that the things would inevitably malfunction from time to time.
My friends Ipad crashes all the time, and that slab of metal and chips is supposed to be the cutting edge of handheld computing these days.

 

[Trajanus]

One thing that bothers the heck out of me, and got me thinking the other day , and that is , what if ..Kenneth Arnold made the whole damn thing up , and didn't see squat out there back in '47?

There sure have been many corroborating sightings since then. One thing that should bother any skeptic is, where could Arnold and so many other alleged hoaxers, have gotten the idea of the "flying saucer?" Why not just claim to have seen alien rocket ships?

If they truly are nuts n' bolts structured objects, then its highly conceivable that the things would inevitably malfunction from time to time.

Or be brought down occasionally.

 

[Frank Stalter]

"Apparently, there was a cryptic mention of it in a Frank Edwards book"

.

Apparently? I have that book; it's in it.

I knew I heard about it somewhere.

 

[Trajanus]

I knew I heard about it somewhere.

Not surprising; it's been noted for many years.

 

[Ezechiel]

I know I have brought it up before but since it keeps coming up I wanted to address it yet again. On the Aztec show it was brought up that if UFO's are supposed alien craft and that such craft are highly advanced somehow that translates into nothing we low tech humans have could be capable of causing it serious problems.

Stanton Friedman has the same frustration.

One day we'll send manned scout missions to foreign worlds, the first missions will obviously have a higher failure rate you would think ?

IMHO, If you're going to accept an ET presence out there, its illogical to expect only one race operating at a fixed technological level. You have to expect capabilities, ranging from relatively close to human to extremely advanced, to produce the appropriate failure rate.

ET craft crashes, though very rare, should be expected and are part of normal galactic technology exchange. A bit like technological panspermia ROFL.

 

[Trajanus]

ET craft crashes, though very rare

I don't know if they are. There sure have been a multitude of reports, compiled by Wood and others.

 

[Ezechiel]

I don't know if they are. There sure have been a multitude of reports, compiled by Wood and others.

Just listened to one of his conferences, he's made quite a bit of money

Once you put a crashed UFO on a plate, you have no choice but to consider the entire wild cosmic context and dynamics that could support its presence and also accept that most of the time you will be in an uncomfortable position of weakness since you don't have the technology to visit them

As a side note....
Physical proof of UFO's with higher technology would force the military to disclose: 'We do not have technological parity with these external entities and we cannot protect you if they become aggressive' (Us indians don't have gun powder yet)

With no physical proof they can still claim that: 'They pose no threat to national security'

I think the fear factor is keeping the lid on this box until we do get relative technological parity to most races that apparently visit us. Until then, the abductions can continue without retribution

 

[Kieran]

Brazel was held by the military and told what to say; ergo some of his testimony isn't reliable. As Randle pointed out, the wreckage couldn't have lain in the fields for many days prior to removal. He couldn't have tolerated that; it would've interferred with the ranch business.



I think the press release went out that day and papers carried the story the next day.



The press release isn't a reliable source of data. It mentioned a DISC being found at the ranch--contrary to the testimony of those actually there.

Brazel said from the very beginning, it was mid-June the 24, he found the wreckage and he reported what he found to the local authorities, the Sheriffs office in Chaves County) and later this information was passed on to the Roswell Army base. For me personally; the date of the 4 of july or even earlier seems more probable considering the military would have to been on this ranch for more than a day or two or more, so to be sure, they left nothing behind during the clean up and before releasing any press release.

 

[Trajanus]

Just listened to one of his conferences, he's made quite a bit of money

Doesn't prove the reports are false. If a third are real, UFO crashes wouldn't be "very rare."

Physical proof of UFO's with higher technology would force the military to disclose: 'We do not have technological parity with these external entities and we cannot protect you if they become aggressive' (Us indians don't have gun powder yet)

But that might lead to needless panic. Better to just keep it secret until there is relative parity, and in the interim hope for the best.

With no physical proof they can still claim that: 'They pose no threat to national security'

They could claim the same thing with it; as long as there's no actual invasion.

 

[Trajanus]

Brazel said from the very beginning, it was mid-June the 24, he found the wreckage

I'm sure Randle and others have argued otherwise.

For me personally; the date of the 4 of july or even earlier seems more probable considering the military would have to been on this ranch for more than a day or two or more, so to be sure, they left nothing behind during the clean up and before releasing any press release.

Right and Brazel would've cleaned up the mess completely and without delay or asked the military to do it, long before July, since the wreckage hindered ranch operations. For this reason, I don't believe it fell there as early as June 24 or earlier. And that in turn means that the possible MOGUL launch on June 4 couldn't have ben responsible.

 

[Ezechiel]

Physical proof of UFO's with higher technology would force the military to disclose: 'We do not have technological parity with these external entities and we cannot protect you if they become aggressive' (Us indians don't have gun powder yet)

But that might lead to needless panic. Better to just keep it secret until there is relative parity, and in the interim hope for the best.

IMHO, that's the attitude in a nutshell (if you give credibility to this phenomena)

If they are out there and they randomly crash on this planet or are shot down, blasted with radar wave... etc... etc... whoever is managing the crash coverups must be going nuts LOLOL.

It likely has to be a tightly managed planetary effort to work at all (Men in black movies come to mind). Sustaining an artificial sense of security in an information age has to be one heck of a challenge

Reality is stranger than fiction... so expect the unexpected

 

[Trajanus]

It likely has to be a tightly managed planetary effort to work at all

The US does appear to have the cooperation of foreign governments like Brazil.