Jun 04 2009
|
|
Roswell and the USAF
Over at The UFO Iconoclast(s), you can find a new posting from me that deals with the USAF’s investigation of Roswell, its Mogul and crash-test-dummy reports, and much more. The basic questions the post asks are: were the USAF’s conclusions not part of a cover-up at all? Is it possible that maybe the USAF is as much in the dark as the rest of us…?
Here’s the link.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, June 4th, 2009 at 12:52 am and is filed under Alien Encounters, Anomalous Phenomena, Beliefs, Books, Breaking News, Close Encounters, Conspiracies, Crash Sites, Evidence, Eyewitness Accounts, Government Projects, History, Roswell, The Redfern Files, UFO Sightings, UFOlogists, UFOlogy. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response or trackback from your site.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- A Mexican UFO »
- Roswell Secrecy »
- Gorightly on Roswell »
- Uncanny Roswell »
- New Roswell UFO Fiction »
- Roswell Alien Amusement Park »
- Roswell Rumbles On… »
- More on the Roswell UFO »
- Roswell: A Human Experiment »
- Roswell Continues… »
|
|
Contribute Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
|
June 4th, 2009 at 5:24 am
So Nick, your reasoning either validates the idea that the USAF found no tangible evidence on Roswell because a)it was destroyed to protect the guilty; or b)it was removed outside of the government’s hands, as the people who believe in a secret government contends.
There are, however, two things that keep worrying me:
1)Why the USAF decided to include the mannequin angle to their official Roswell explanation. It was completely counter-productive if what they wanted was to quell the rumors surrounding the Roswell legend. As you point out, it would have been easier to just keep quiet. Or better yet: let an independent investigator (a-la Bill Moore) to disclose the issue.
2)If you’re correct that Roswell was more about secret altitude tests with Japanese POWs, then we have to remember there’s a reason you conduct a test in the first place: to gather data. Data to be used in a way that yields a certain benefit to you. And in the world of science & technology, the data must always be validated in some way; you don’t take it at face value. So, even if they destroyed all material evidence, there should still be some record to inform the persons intended to use the data on how was the data acquired originally. If you also destroy that evidence, the data becomes useless.
These articles of yours make my retinas catch fire. Keep at it!
June 4th, 2009 at 5:47 am
RPJ:
Good points you raise.
Re Point No.1: One thing that a lot of people forget is that President Clinton made a public statement back in 1995 (after the Mogul report surfaced - and which largely avoided the “bodies” issue) to the effect that “if alien bodies were found at Roswell, the Air Force didn’t tell me.”
That may be connected with something that prompted the USAF.
Some researchers have commented that maybe the USAF preferred to come up with an explanation for the bodies, rather than have to suggest elderly military vets were liars. In other words, it may have been an act of diplomacy to provide an explanation, but to not make the witnesses look like liars or fantasists.
Re Point No. 2: If the story told to me is true, one of the key factors of all the interviewees is that they were all adamant on one thing: the experiments were largely failures in terms of providing anything of true value. One source cited in the book described the experiments as “dipshit.”
This is the thing a lot of people don’t realize about the book: the witnesses did not champion the experiments and say it helped advance knowledge (although I concede that would have been the goal). Rather, the balloons and devices used didn’t prove to be that workable.
So, in that sense, it would perhaps be logical to resign everything to the rubbish-bin - precisely because it was all deemed an embarrassing failure.
June 4th, 2009 at 6:55 am
Mmm, I’d forgotten about Clinton, and that member of his cabinet who was a UFO buff —whose name I don’t recollect at the moment.
And I see the logic in your argument re. point 2. If the experiments were catastrophic failures, and on top of that morally questionable, then there would be an inclination to call the ‘Cleaners’ and “pretend as if nothing ever happened”.
Although I would contend that, in Science, even a negative result is still worthy to be recorded, if anything to prevent someone to make the same mistake again. But the methodology of Science has never paired well with the customs of Politics