INTRODUCTION
Although it is often presented as a body of “facts,” I see most knowledge as better represented by a network of related arguments. This book, which is designed to be amended frequently, presents, so far, three important UFO cases in just this structured way. The book covers Roswell, the 1952 Washington, D.C. sightings and the Portage County case.
For 70 years, investigators have been compiling UFO reports, but the giggle factor persists. Skeptics have convinced some of these investigators that in order to break the impasse, they must come up with an undeniably genuine photograph, a “smoking gun” government document, a definitive landing trace or a piece of UFO hardware.
But these researchers are entitled to have more faith in their own judgment—it is through a rational acceptance of eyewitness testimony that many of them have, themselves, come to believe in the existence of flying saucers; they are entitled to claim that it is not necessary to put forth hard evidence in order to convince others.
But if the existing evidence is adequate to convince a rational person, why has the marginalization of ufology lasted so long? Why has the giggle factor not gone away? The answer can be found in a metaphor: ufologists are like a group of police detectives who, working on a case, have amassed police reports and analyses, keeping it all in a bulging case file, adding to it over many years. Although the evidence they have compiled is so strong that they could have proved their case long ago, no prosecutor has ever brought it to trial. No prosecutor has ever committed him- or herself to having the case argued diligently, person-to-person, in front of a jury. While it is true that UFO experts have occasionally debated the issue in public, and many books have been written by ufologists, there has never been a concerted, sustained, effort to argue the case, person-to-person and in public. I believe that just such an effort, and only such an effort, can break the impasse, can bring ufology into the mainstream.
I have established TEUFOS (the Truth-Engine UFO Society) to promote this idea. The present book, The UFO Dialectic is designed as a guide, a compendium of best arguments, for any debaters who might wish to participate. As an eBook, it can be amended easily in order to add arguments, or to improve existing arguments.
But the Principle of Charity tells us to acknowledge that the other side may, in fact, be right or partly right. That’s why skeptics will be invited to join TEUFOS, and skeptics, too, can use this book as a guide, and can help to amend it. As we publish future editions of The UFO Dialectic, we will make sure to present the arguments of both sides in their strongest possible form. The term “dialectic” in the book’s title refers to a kind of debate whose participants argue not to win, but to reveal truth. We do not want to win if that means convincing others of something that is not true. The mission of TEUFOS is to reveal the truth about UFOs, whatever that truth may turn out to be.
You, the reader, can suggest changes to any part of this book at any time. We intend to publish periodically new, amended, editions of the book so that its arguments, pro and con, will grow more and more compelling over time. In fact, the book itself can be thought of as a forum.
I. THE CRITICAL UFO DIALECTIC
ARTICLE 1: ROSWELL
The alleged crash of an alien craft near Roswell, New Mexico in July, 1947
The Arguments:
Replies to my argument:
(1) The “Military Documents” Arguments. Skeptic argues that various military documents prove that no exotic debris was found at Roswell.
(2) The “Flying Saucers Wouldn’t Crash” Argument. Skeptic argues that flying saucers would be too technologically advanced to crash, and therefore there was no saucer crash at Roswell.
(3) The “Men of the 509th” Argument. Skeptic argues that if there’d been an exotic crash at Roswell, then the men of the 509th would’ve known about it. They didn’t. Therefore there was no exotic crash.
(4) The “The Distances Are Too Great” Argument. Skeptic argues that the debris was probably not exotic, because it’s unlikely that any spacefarers could’ve traveled the vast distance between us and the stars.
(5) The “Extraordinary Claims” Argument. Skeptic argues that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
(6) The “The Debris Was Not Visually Complex” Argument. Skeptic argues that the debris was too simple to be crash debris.
(7) The “It Was a Mogul Balloon” Argument—Part I. Skeptic claims that the debris found was the wreckage of a Mogul balloon.
(8) The “It Was a Mogul Balloon” Argument—Part II: The ""Amazing Coincidence” Argument. Skeptic argues that it would be extremely unlikely that the wreckage of a spaceship would match the parts of a Mogul balloon as closely as the Roswell debris did.
(9) The “It’s Not Scientific” Argument. Skeptic argues that it’s not scientific to accept the witness reports as evidence.
(10) The “They Wouldn’t Keep It Secret” Argument. Skeptic believes that those in the know would have not kept the secret.
(11) The “They Couldn’t Keep It Secret” Argument. Skeptic says that such a secret could not have been kept.
B&M = Berlitz, Charles and Moore, William L., The Roswell Incident. New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1980.
R&S = Randle, Kevin D. and Schmitt, Donald R., UFO Crash at Roswell. New York: Avon Books, 1991.
F&B = Friedman, Stanton T. and Berliner, Don , Crash at Corona. New York: Paragon House, 1992.
C&S = Carey, Thomas J. and Schmitt, Donald R., Witness to Roswell, Franklin Lakes, NJ: The Career Press, 2007.
J = Kent Jeffrey, “Roswell—Anatomy of a Myth,” MUFON UFO Journal, no. 350, June 1997.
D1 = Robert J. Durant, “The Roswell debris testimony of Dr. Jesse Marcel, Jr., Part 1,” MUFON UFO Journal, Jan. 1998.
D2 = Robert J. Durant, “The Roswell debris testimony of Dr. Jesse Marcel, Jr., Part 2,” MUFON UFO Journal, Feb. 1998.
D3 = Robert J. Durant, “The Roswell debris testimony of Dr. Jesse Marcel, Jr., Part 3,” MUFON UFO Journal, Mar. 1998.
To supply a framework for the discussion, I begin with a chronology of the events surrounding the discovery of debris on the Foster Ranch near Roswell, New Mexico in 1947. This chronology, though much of it is not in dispute, reflects my own point of view.
Chronology
July 2, 1947
At 9:50 P.M., Roswell, New Mexico. Hardware dealer Dan Wilmot and his wife saw a big, glowing object in the sky. (Roswell Daily Record—B&M, pp.21-2)
During a thunderstorm, Rancher Mac Brazel, near Corona, New Mexico, heard a crash louder than, different from thunder. (J. Marcel Sr. — interview 1979 [B&M, p. 64, R&S p. 37]. Marcel was Roswell Base Intelligence Officer, assigned to the only atomic bomb group in the world at that time.)
To Mac, it seemed that the lightning had been attracted to a single place on the ranch.1
July 3, 1947
Mac Brazel, riding on horseback with a young neighbor, Dee Proctor, found the debris field on the Foster Ranch (about 75 miles northwest of Roswell). The debris was exotic, very light but extremely strong, having very strange properties.2
Mac Brazel took some pieces of the wreckage to show his nearest neighbors, Floyd and Loretta Proctor.3
July 3-6? 1947
Brazel was irritated because the sheep would not cross the debris field.4
Mac talked to neighbor Clint Sultemeier and took pieces of the wreckage to his uncle, Hollis Wilson.5
Apparently, Mac found a second site, with bodies. Others came to the debris field, some taking souvenirs. Mac talked to his friend, state police officer Robert Scroggins, about his discovery.6
July 4 1947
A piece of the debris, a kind of metal foil that, after being crumpled, would resume its original shape, was seen at the 4th of July rodeo in Capitan, New Mexico.7
July 5, 1947
Mac Brazel went to Corona, New Mexico and visited Wade's Bar and the Corona General Store, showing people pieces of the strange wreckage. Acquaintances thought that the debris might be from a flying saucer and suggested Mac go to the authorities about it.8
July 6, 1947
Mac Brazel went to Roswell (some say he went to Roswell on Monday the 7th. They believe that Brazel came into town for other business as well, and so it makes sense that this would have been Monday, not Sunday). He went to Chaves County sheriff”s office. Sheriff Wilcox called Major Jesse Marcel, Sr., ranking staff officer in charge of intelligence at the Roswell Army Air Base.
Marcel talked to Col. Blanchard, base commander. Blanchard ordered Marcel to go look at the debris field. Marcel and a CIC [Counter-Intelligence Corps] agent, Sheridan Cavitt, followed Brazel out to the ranch. Arriving late, they spent the night there.9
Some of the debris that Mac brought to Roswell was put on an airplane at Roswell AAF and flown to Washington on orders of Gen. Clements McMullin at the Pentagon.10
July 7, 1947
A.M.: Brazel showed Marcel and Cavitt the debris field, an area about three quarters of a mile long by several hundred yards wide.11 According to Marcel, “It was definitely not a weather or tracking device, nor was it any sort of plane or missile. What it was we didn’t know….It was something I had never seen before, or since.... It certainly wasn’t anything built by us….”12
Cavitt went back, ahead of Marcel, and reported to Blanchard.13
Marcel spent all day (of July 7th) surveying the debris field and loading his vehicle with the materials.14
[If Mac had come to Roswell, and Marcel and Cavitt had driven to the ranch, on the 7th, as some claim, then the surveying and loading would have happened on the 8th, and, contrary to Maj. Marcel's testimony, would not have lasted all day, but would have been accomplished during the early morning hours of the 8th, so that when Marcel got back to his house, it would still have been morning.]
An impact site was discovered by archaeologists 35 or 40 miles northwest of Roswell, much closer to Roswell than the debris field. A nearly intact craft was recovered there by the military, as were several alien bodies and, possibly, a live alien. The Lt. Governor of New Mexico, Joe Montoya, saw them as they were brought into a hangar on base.15
At some point, someone apparently came to the ranch and escorted Brazel back to Roswell, to the home of the owner of radio station, KGFL, Walt Whitmore, Sr. Brazel’s testimony was recorded late in the evening.16
July 8, 1947
Marcel arrived back at Roswell in the early morning hours of the 8th. Marcel stopped at his house and showed the debris to his wife and 11-year old son [one month shy of his 12th birthday], Jesse Marcel Jr. (later Dr. Marcel).17 Maj. Marcel laid the pieces out on the kitchen floor. The family tried to put the pieces together, but couldn’t find a match for even two pieces.
Then Marcel and a CIC agent [Cavitt?] visited with Col. Blanchard in his quarters.18
In the early morning, the Army came to Whitmore's home and grabbed Brazel and his recorded testimony.
There was a regularly scheduled staff meeting at 7:30 a.m. at the Roswell AAF. In attendance were the base commander, Col. Blanchard; Maj. Marcel; Capt. Cavitt; operations officer, Col. James I. Hopkins; public information officer, Lt. Haut; base adjutant, Maj. Patrick Saunders; personnel officer, Maj. Isadore Brown; supply officer, Lt. Col. Ulysses S. Nero; Blanchard’s boss at Carswell AAF, Fort Worth, Brig. Gen. Roger Ramey; and Ramey's chief of staff, Col. Thomas J. DuBose. At the meeting, Marcel and Cavitt reported on their findings at the Foster ranch debris field. Pieces of the strange debris were passed around the room. There was a discussion about whether the discovery should be made public. Ramey said that they needed to divert public attention from the more important impact site by acknowledging the Foster ranch debris field.19
About noon, Lt. Walter Haut, public information officer at the Roswell Army Air Base, issued a news release:
“The many rumors regarding the flying disc became a reality yesterday when the intelligence office of the 509th Bomb Group of the Eighth Air Force, Roswell Army Air Field, was fortunate enough to gain possession of a disc....”
Haut’s release was picked up by the press: the Roswell Daily Record ran the headline, “RAAF Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch in Roswell Region.”
Capt. Oliver “Pappy” Henderson flew the first group of aliens, including the living one (the aliens from the impact site, near Roswell(?)), from Roswell to Wright Field in Ohio.20
Teletype operator at radio station KSWS, Lydia Sleppy, says that she received a call from staff member Johnny McBoyle reporting on the recovery of the debris. She began to send the story out to the network on the teletype, when she was interrupted by the bell, and the machine began to type, "This is the FBI, you will cease transmitting.”21
Brig. General Roger Ramey, Commander of 8th AF District at Fort Worth went on the air on a Fort Worth radio station, saying that the debris was from a weather balloon. Ramey had Blanchard order the Roswell portion of the debris to be flown to Fort Worth, then to Wright-Patterson Field.22 It was Ramey who was responsible for having created the weather balloon cover story in order to appease the press.23 The story about the weather balloon was devised in order to “put out the fire.”24 Bill Brazel said that the material was “definitely not any kind of balloon. We’ve picked up balloons all over this country.”25
The clean-up at the ranch began.26
The second flight after the discovery left from Roswell. It was scheduled to land at Ft. Worth, then to go on to Wright Field. The pilot was Lt. Col. Payne Jennings. The co-pilot was Lt. Col. Robert Barrowclough, the Roswell base executive officer. Maj. Marcel was on board carrying a box of debris. On arriving at Fort Worth, Marcel reported to General Ramey.27
General Ramey called the press into his office to photograph what are clearly the remains of a weather balloon. Ramey claimed that these remains were what was found on the Foster Ranch. Ramey claimed that the continuation of the flight from Roswell to Wright field was cancelled, but it actually was not.28
At night, trucks with spotlights were seen heading to the second site found by Brazel.29
July 9, 1947
Brazel, now in the custody of the military, was taken by military officers to the Roswell Daily Record to talk to reporters. Brazel now said that the object was rubber and that the debris was spread out over an area of only 200 yards in diameter. He said that there was scotch tape and tape that had flowers printed on it. This was a new story.30
Later, Brazel was escorted to radio station KGFL, where again he told what was apparently a cover story given him by the Army: the object, he now claimed, was nothing more than a balloon. When reporter and announcer Frank Joyce mentioned that his story had changed, Brazel stuck to the new story, but then added, “It’ll go hard on me”.31
The second group of alien bodies (apparently from the second site that Brazel found, near the debris field) was flown from Roswell to Fort Worth aboard a B-29 called the Straight Flush.32
July 9-15, 1947
Brazel was kept in military custody in Roswell.33
Floyd Proctor, in his interview with William Moore in June, 1979, stated, “They kept [Mac] there a week, under guard. He was real talkative about that stuff until he came back, then he wouldn’t say much at all.” Proctor said that he and neighbor L. D. Sparks saw him in Roswell, during this period, escorted by at least 6 soldiers. Mac walked past them as if he didn’t know them.34
July 15, 1947
Mac Brazel returned to the ranch.35
Notes
1. Bill Brazel. C&S p.187
2. R&S pp.37-8. Interview with Loretta Proctor, Brazel’s neighbor.
3. R&S p.38
4. R&S p.38. Interview with Tommy Tyree, who started working for Brazel a month or so after the event.
5. C&S pp.47-8
6. C&S p.49
7. C&S p.49
8. Bill Brazel, Mac’s son—B&M p.77 and C&S p.48
9. many sources
10. Col. Thomas DuBose, chief of staff of Gen. Roger Ramey, commander of the Eighth Air Force at Fort Worth. C&S p.113
11. F&B p.10
12. J. Marcel, Sr.—B&M p.65
13. C&S p.184
14. J. Marcel, Sr.—B&M p.67
15. C&S pp.84-5, 88 and 216
16. C&S pp.68-9, R&S p. 71 and B&M p.87
17. Maj. J. Marcel Sr.—B&M p.70
18. R&S p.56
19. sealed affidavit of Walter Haut—C&S pp.215-6
20. C&S p.205
21. F&B, p.77 — The authors date this event to July 7th, but imply it was the same day that Haut distributed his press release (which happened on the 8th)
22. B&M pp.28-9 and J. Marcel Sr.—B&M p.68
23. J. Marcel Sr.—B&M p.68
24. Brig. General Thomas Jefferson Dubose, then a colonel, Ramey’s adjutant. Interview Sept. 9, 1979—B&M p.31
25. Bill Brazel—B&M pp.80-1
26. according to Trini Chavez
27. C&S p.113
28. many sources
29. Loretta Proctor
30. R&S p.41
31. R&S p.42
32. C&S pp.146-7
33. R&S pp.42-3
34. B&M pp.83-4
35. R&S p.216
THE ARGUMENTS
On July 3, 1947, Mac Brazel, riding on horseback with 7-year-old neighbor, Dee Proctor, on the Foster ranch near Corona, New Mexico, found a field of debris. Mac told Floyd Proctor, his closest neighbor, that the debris was “the strangest stuff he had ever seen.”36
A few days later, on July 6, Mac took some of the debris to Roswell, and showed it to Sheriff Wilcox, who contacted Roswell Army Air Field. The base security officer, Maj. Marcel, who, with Capt. Sheridan Cavitt accompanied Mac Brazel to the Foster ranch to inspect the debris field, stated that the debris “was nothing we had ever seen before,” He said he was sure that it was not any kind of aircraft. “It was nothing made on this Earth,” he said.37
According to the wife of Sheridan Cavitt, shortly after Maj. Marcel’s return from Ft. Worth [see chronology], the two couples met to play bridge. In the kitchen, the two men tried to boil a piece of the crash debris. The material was unaffected by even the highest heat.38
Retired Army Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) Master Sergeant Lewis S. “Bill” Rickett stated that, after the incident, he was assigned to assist Manhattan Project meteor scientist Dr. Lincoln La Paz of the University of New Mexico on a mission to determine the crashed UFO's speed and trajectory. Together, the two men traveled around the New Mexico desert looking for clues. At a location about 5 miles northwest of the Foster Ranch debris field, they found a spot where the craft might have first touched down. They discovered a small number of the strange pieces of debris there. Also, the sand there was crystallized—apparently a result of tremendous heat. Rickett said that the crashed object was not a balloon and that he could never discern its purpose. He said that “it wasn’t ours!”39
Over a year after Rickett and La Paz had done their work, Rickett met, in Washington, D.C., with Joe Wirth, who was also a counterintelligence agent. Wirth said that the government's best researchers were still unable to identify the debris’ metallurgical composition, and still were not able to cut it.40
On July 8, 1947, Mac Brazel told the Roswell Daily Record that the object that crashed on the ranch was not a weather balloon.41
The Army told Mac Brazel that they had determined that “…it wasn't anything made by us.”42
Retired Gen. Arthur E. Exon in 1947 was a member of the Air Material Command at Wright Field, where the Roswell materials were sent. He was at that time a lieutenant colonel, and an administration student in technology at the Foreign Technology Division there. By 1964, Exon had become the Wright-Patterson AFB base commander. He knew people who had firsthand knowledge about the artifacts. Exon told investigators that after testing was done on these materials, the scientific consensus was that the materials had come from space.43
Exon further commented on the materials that arrived at Wright Field aboard the flight from Ft. Worth (this was the secret flight that was the supposedly cancelled continuation of the flight that took Maj. Marcel and debris from Roswell on July 8, 1947—see chronology). He told investigators that the analysts who tested the material said that it was “very unusual.” Exon said that the analysts were puzzled by these materials—they felt that what they were examining was something new. He said that, although some thought that the object might be Russian, the consensus was that the material had come “from space.” Exon declared that “Everyone from the White House down knew that what we had found was not of this world within 24 hours of our finding it.”44
First Lt. Walter Haut, the Public Information Officer (PIO) for the 509th Bomb Group at the Roswell Army Air Field, who, at around noon on July 8, 1947, had put out the press release that said that the military had recovered a flying disk, in 2002 prepared a sealed affidavit to be opened only after his death. Haut died in December, 2005. In the affidavit, Haut describes the materials that were handed around at a July 8th morning staff meeting. Haut states that these materials were like nothing he had ever seen. He says that nobody at the meeting could identify the materials.45
BEAMS
There were lightweight beams, about 3/8 or 1/2 inch square. They bore a superficial resemblance to balsa wood, but they were not wood: they were very hard, but flexible, and could not be either burned or broken.46
Upon returning to Roswell early on July 8 with samples of the strange debris, Maj. Marcel stopped by his home to show the material to his wife and 11-year-old son, before taking it to the base. In the debris that Major Marcel laid out on his kitchen floor, there was a single rod, shaped like an “I-beam.” It was 12” to 18” long and its ends were not damaged. The beam did not flex (but Jesse Marcel, Jr., who handled the beam, cannot remember having tried to bend it.). Marcel, Jr. (later Dr. Marcel) said that the beam seemed more like metal than wood.47
Bill Brazel, Mac’s son, examined an object of the same kind and said of the beam’s material: “Wood, I call it wood, I don’t know what it was; it was something like balsa wood, but it wouldn’t burn and I couldn’t cut it with my knife.”48
Loretta Proctor, Mac’s neighbor, claimed that Mac showed her and her husband, Floyd, a beam. She said, “We cut on it with a knife and would hold a match on it, and it wouldn't burn.”49
Lt. Walter Haut, in his affidavit, stated that at the July 8th, 1947 staff meeting, where participants were shown debris that no one could identify, speaks of pieces that had unusual markings running along their length that were passed around.50
PFC Lloyd E. Nelson clerked for Lt. Haut in the RAAF base Public Information Office. Nelson says that at the time of the incident (he thinks it was Friday, July 11) Lt. Haut and Maj. Marcel came into the office and showed the people in the office small pieces of the debris. Nelson says that he was shown, and handled, one or two I-beams that were short and had reddish writing on them that he could not identify.51
SYMBOLS
Dr. Marcel saw a line of symbol-like markings on the inner surface of one side, running along the entire length of the beam, between the lips of the “I”. The markings were purple or pink. “He was puzzled about how they were fixed to the beam, and concluded that they appeared to be printed or embossed.”52
Lt. Walter Haut stated that he had seen these markings (see above),53 as did PFC Lloyd Nelson (see above).54
PARCHMENT-LIKE MATERIAL
There was a parchment-like material, brown and very strong. This substance would not burn, or even smoke.55
Mac Brazel told neighbor Floyd Proctor that the parchment-like material could not be cut with a knife.56
BLACK PLASTIC MATERIAL (LIKE BAKELITE)
There was some “black plastic material which looked organic in nature.”57
“The ‘bakelite’ was as thin as the foil. The pieces that Dr. Marcel examined were small, flat and smooth. He said that they all appeared to have been broken off of larger pieces. There was much more of the foil than of the “bakelite.” The “bakelite” was black.58
PFC Lloyd Nelson (see above) was shown by Lt. Haut and Maj. Marcel a piece of what might have been this “bakelite” material: Nelson describes it as a very hard ceramic-like or flint-like material that seemed to have been broken off of another piece. One side of it was darker than the other.59
METAL FOIL
General
Mac Brazel told Floyd Proctor that “the metal was different from anything he had ever seen.”60
Neither side of the foil that Dr. Marcel handled (he may not have handled all of the pieces that were in the kitchen) had paper attached to it, and he said that he saw no tape on the foil. He also stated that the foil he inspected was neither creased nor abraded.61
Dr. Marcel said that the pieces of metallic debris varied in size. The largest was about 4” x 6”. The pieces were almost weightless. They did not flex while being handled. (Dr. Marcel has no memory of having tried to flex them, though).62
Walt Whitmore, Jr., son of radio station KGFL’s owner, said of this foil, “[It was] very much like lead foil in appearance but could not be torn or cut at all.”63
Lt. Walter Haut, in his affidavit, described pieces of a material that looked like metal foil, but was very strong, that was passed around during the July 8th staff meeting.64
PFC Lloyd Nelson (see above) describes three pieces of metal that Haut and Marcel showed him: they were very thin, very hard, and resembled aluminum. He said that Marcel told him that those who were testing the metal had found it to be very hard and very light, and different from anything that they had ever seen before.65
The color of the foil was like the color of “lead” foil(the color of the foil in a pack of cigarettes c. 1947.)66
Gen. Exon (see above), apparently speaking of the metal, said that although some of it could be ripped easily, other pieces were very thin but very strong—even heavy hammers couldn’t dent it. He said it was somewhat flexible. He said that some of the pieces were “flimsy and…tougher than hell, and the [rest] was almost like foil but strong.”67
Flexible Metal Foil
This material couldn’t be torn. It could be wrinkled and it would return to its original shape. It could not be creased or bent like normal foil. The army told Mac Brazel that they had determined that it definitely was not made by us.68
Frankie Dwyer Rowe, a 12-year-old girl at the time of the incident, stopped by the fire station after a dental appointment to wait for her father, who was a crew chief in the Roswell Fire department. While she waited, a highway patrol officer, Robert Scroggins, came into the station to show the firemen a piece of the wreckage that he said he’d gotten from “someone” in the nearby town of Corona. Rowe, who was allowed to handle the object, described it as a small, silvery sheet that, if wadded up in the hand and dropped onto the surface of a table, would spread out like mercury into a thin irregular sheet in one or two seconds. She said that they were not able to cut it with scissors; nor could they burn it, scratch it, or give it a lasting crease.69
Phyllis McGuire, daughter of Sheriff Wilcox, stated that her father told her that some of the pieces of wreckage resembled tinfoil, but it wasn’t. He told her that if you wadded it up in your hand and then released it, it would resume its original flatness.”70
Shirley Brazel described a material that, when wadded up and released, would flow like water.71
Rancher L. D. Sparks described a piece of thin, foil-like material that Dan Richards, the son of a local rancher, had him throw into the air while Dan fired a rifle at it. The shots just ricocheted off of the material. Sparks wadded the material into a ball—when dropped, it would unfold as it fell.72
Earl Fulford was in 1947 a staff sergeant assigned to the 603rd Air Engineering Squadron at the Roswell base. He had a top secret clearance. Fulford said that he was taken to help clean up the debris field on the Foster ranch. Fulford said that, as part of the clean-up crew, he picked up some small, silvery, metal-like pieces. He described the largest as being triangular, 3 or 4 inches wide and 12 to 15 inches in length. He remembers that the piece flexed a little bit when he picked it up, but he could wad it up in his hand. When he opened his hand it would, in a second or two, return to its original shape.73
Sgt. Homer G. Rowlette, Jr. was assigned to the 603rd Air Engineering Squadron at Roswell at the time of the incident. Rowlette told his son, Larry, and his daughter, Carlene, that the story of the crashed flying saucer was true. He told Larry that he’d participated in the clean-up. He described a thin foil that retained its shape.74
Inflexible Metal Foil
There were many small pieces of a tinfoil-like metal, but they were not tinfoil. These pieces were as thin as the tinfoil in a pack of cigarettes, but, Marcel Sr. was told later by military personnel, could not be bent, and a sledgehammer would not put a dent in it. The material was almost weightless. It could not be cut or torn.75
Jesse Marcel told Walter Haut that when one end of a piece of the lightweight metal was rested on a rock and the other end was placed on the ground, a sledgehammer could not dent it.76
Retired Army Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) Master Sergeant Lewis S. “Bill” Rickett stated that he was taken to one of the crash sites by Captain Sheridan Cavitt (head of counterintelligence for the CIC). Rickett described pieces that were thin, light and strong. Rickett picked up a piece, one that was about 4 inches by 10 inches in size, very thin, extremely light in weight, and slightly curved. He put it over his knee to bend it, but he could not do it. According to Rickett, Edwin Easley (the Roswell base provost marshal) was there also, and Cavitt said to Easley, “Smart guy. Trying to do what we couldn’t.”77
PFC Lloyd E. Nelson, who, at the time of the incident, clerked for Lt. Haut and who says that he was shown pieces of the wreckage by Lt. Haut and Maj. Marcel, says that he was shown, and was able to examine, three pieces of very thin, very hard, aluminum-like material. He says that Marcel told him that those who were testing the metal had found it to be very light and very hard, and different from anything that they had ever seen before.78
BLACK BOX
Jesse Marcel, Sr. said that he believed that Sheridan Cavitt found a box “several inches square” that appeared to be made of metal. Since there seemed to be no way to open it, and since it didn’t look like an instrument package, “we threw it in with the rest of the stuff.” (Jesse Marcel Sr.)79
As noted above, retired Army Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) Master Sergeant Lewis S. “Bill” Rickett stated that, after the incident, he was assigned to assist meteor scientist Dr. Lincoln La Paz of the University of New Mexico on a mission to discover the crashed UFO’s speed and trajectory. Together, he said, as the two men traveled around the New Mexico desert looking for clues, they came across a place, about 5 miles northwest of the Foster ranch debris field, where the object might have first touched down. At this site, they found a small number of the strange materials. One of the artifacts that they recovered there was a black box, a bit larger than a shoebox, without seams and made of a material that resembled shiny plastic—it felt weightless. The box could not be opened, Rickett said.80
THREAD-LIKE MATERIAL
Bill Brazel, Mac’s son, picked up some of the remaining pieces of debris in the months after the event. Among these were pieces of a thread- or wire-like material a little thicker than sewing thread. It could not be snapped by hand.81
In 1949, Army officers visited Bill Brazel, Macs son, and confiscated all of the pieces of the debris that he had collected and had put into a cigar box.82
Notes
36. B&M p.83
37. many sources
38. related by Mary Cavitt. C&S p.78
39. C&S pp.178, 192
40. related by Rickett. C&S p.179
41. C&S p.189
42. related by Bill Brazel, Mac’s son. C&S p.189
43. Exon interview—C&S p.190, 194; R&S pp.108-110
44. Exon interview—C&S pp.190, 194; R&S pp.108-110
45. Haut affidavit. C&S pp.210, 214-6
46. J. Marcel, Sr., B&M p.65
47. D2 p.15
48. D3 p.7
49. F&B p.72
50. C&S p.216
51. C&S p.240
52. quote: Durant. Multiple sources, including D2 p.15
53. C&S p.216
54. C&S p.240
55. J. Marcel, Sr., B&M pp.65-6
56 Floyd Proctor, B&M p.83
57. Dr. J. Marcel, B&M p.70
58. D2 p.17
59. C&S p.240
60. B&M p.83
61. D1 p.11
62. D1 p.10
63. F&B p.73
64. C&S p.216
65. C&S p.240
66. D1 pp.10-11
67. Exon interview. C&S p.194
68. Bill Brazel, Macs son, B&M p.79
69. C&S pp.170-1 and other sources
70. The UFO Magazine UFO Encyclopedia, William J. Birnes, ed., New York, Pocket Books, 2004, p.83
71. related by Shirley Brazel. C&S p.48
72. related by L. D. Sparks. C&S p.52
73. related by Earl Fulford. C&S pp.101, 105-7
74. related by Larry Rowlette. C&S p.199
75. J. Marcel, Sr., B&M pp.65-7
76. Stanton Friedman, “Kent Jeffrey and Roswell,” July 21, 1997
77. related by Rickett, C&S p.184
78. related by Lloyd E. Nelson. C&S p.240
79. B&M pp.65-6
80. related by Rickett. C&S p.178
81. Bill Brazel, B&M p.79
82. C&S p.74
Now, here’s the second part of my argument:
Exotic bodies were found in
association with the July, 1947 crash
near Roswell:
Roswell Mortician, Glenn Dennis states that, on July 8, 1947, doctors at Roswell Army Air Field kept calling him, asking questions about techniques that might be used to preserve three bodies that had been exposed to the elements for a couple of days or more. They were most interested in learning how best the bodies could be moved. He said that they told him that three were dead; two of these were mangled, but the third was in fairly good condition. They asked whether child-sized caskets were available. They wondered if they could put all three into one casket.83
Later that day, Dennis escorted an airman who had been injured in a motorcycle accident to the base hospital. (The funeral home also provided ambulance services.) As he walked into the hospital with the airman, he noticed a piece of metallic-like material in the back of a military ambulance that was parked there—the piece looked like the front of a canoe-like object. It had strange symbols along it.
Inside the hospital, in the hallway, Dennis said, he ran into a nurse he knew. Alarmed, she told him he’d better get out before he got into a lot of trouble. As he left the building, he was confronted by a black sergeant and a red-haired captain who told him that he would need an embalmer himself if he didn’t get out of there.
According to Dennis, a day or two later, over lunch, he talked to the nurse. She told him that non-human bodies had arrived at the hospital. She said they were small, had only four fingers on each hand, and the upper arm was shorter than the lower. The heads were large, and the eyes were large and sunken. The bones were very delicate. She told Dennis that she had to leave the room because of the smell. She said that the doctors had to abandon the autopsy because of the stench.
Dennis told investigators that the nurse’s name was Naomi Selff. When researchers confronted Dennis with the fact that no military records existed of a Naomi Selff, he said, “I gave you a phony name because I promised her that I would never reveal it to anyone.” This diminishes the value of Dennis’ testimony, but researchers Carey and Schmitt say that they have been told by witnesses that Dennis had spoken to them about the phone calls from the base and about the confrontation at the base hospital long before the Roswell incident became generally known.84
Capt. Oliver Wendell “Pappy” Henderson, in July of 1947, was with the First Air Transport Unit assigned to Roswell AAF. Henderson was a veteran of thirty B-24 missions in Europe. Researchers Friedman and Berliner say that “Henderson may have been the most highly regarded pilot at Roswell AAF.”85 According to researchers Carey and Schmitt, on July 8, Henderson flew the first group of aliens, including the living alien, to Wright Field. (see chronology)86
In early 1978, Henderson confided to a close friend, a dentist who had been a fellow military officer, named Dr. John Kromschroeder that he had seen the alien bodies. About a year later he showed Kromschroeder a small piece of gray metal that he claimed came from the wreckage. Kromschroeder had been a student of metallurgy, and had never seen anything with its properties. The piece looked like a piece of aluminum, but it was harder than aluminum, and stiffer. He tried to bend it but could not. Henderson told him that the piece came from the lining of the ship. He said that when it was energized, it produced a soft light.87
Henderson said that the aliens reminded him of “Casper the Ghost.”88
Henderson’s wife, Sappho, said that in 1980 or 1981, Pappy showed her an article in a newspaper in a grocery store. The article described the Roswell UFO crash and the discovery of the alien bodies beside the ship. He asked her to read the article, because it was true. He said that he was the pilot who flew the materials to Dayton, Ohio [i.e., to Wright Field]. He said that since it was now published in the newspaper, he felt he could tell her about it. He told Sappho that the creatures were small and had large heads. He said that their suits were made of a material that was different from any material he was familiar with. Sappho believed that Pappy said that they had packed the bodies in dry ice.89
Pappy Henderson's daughter, Mary Kathryn Groode, said that while looking at the stars one night with her father, he told her “I’m looking for flying saucers. They’re real, you know.” She also said that, in 1981, while she was visiting her parents’ home, her father showed her a newspaper article on the Roswell UFO crash and the finding of alien bodies. He told her that he had seen the crashed vehicle and the bodies, and that he was the pilot who had flown the materials to Ohio. He told her that the aliens—she thinks he said there were three of them—were small and pale. They had big heads and slanted eyes. He said they were humanoid in appearance, but were different from humans. He said that he felt that he could tell her, because the story had been published.90
In 1969, Sgt. Melvin E. Brown, a cook with the 509th Atomic Bomb Squadron told his family about his involvement in the Roswell incident. He stated that he, along with another soldier, was assigned to guard something covered by a tarp in the back of a military ambulance truck. Against orders, he sneaked a look under the tarp and saw alien bodies. He described them as being small, with yellowish-orange skin that was lizard-like in texture (leathery and beaded).91
His daughter, Beverly, relates how, on his deathbed in 1986, he talked only about Roswell. He kept repeating that “It was not a damn weather balloon.”92
Capt. Darwin E. Rasmussen of the 509th, the operations officer of the 718th Bomb Group, told his family shortly before his death that the UFO crash really happened and that four alien bodies had been found with the wreckage. Rasmussen’s cousin, Elaine Vegh heard him say to her father that he had helped recover the bodies from a crashed saucer.93
Col. Arthur E. Exon became the base commander of Wright-Patterson AFB in 1964. He was promoted on Aug. 20, 1965 to the rank of brigadier general. In July of 1947, then Lt. Colonel Exon was at Wright Field when the Roswell materials arrived. He was told by colleagues that the bodies had also been brought to the base.94
Exon flew over the crash sites. He said that he saw two different sites. He spoke of the pieces that were found on the ranch, stating that most of these were metal. But he also claimed that there was another site where “the main body of the spacecraft” had been found, “where they did say there were bodies.” He said that the bodies were found outside the ship. Exon said that his information was that the bodies went to Wright Field.95
During the 1994-5 GAO investigation of the Roswell Incident, a congressional staff member who interviewed Exon in the general’s home wrote in his report that Exon seemed to be afraid—as if he feared that his house was bugged.96
Maj. Jesse Marcel may well have known about the bodies (as would be expected, since it seems clear that there were two body sites, one found by Mac Brazel [see below]). In fact, at the end of a 1985 radio telephone interview on KOAT, Albuquerue, Marcel said, “I haven’t told everything.”97
Sue Marcel Methane, a relative of Marcel, says that he told her that the aliens were “white, powdery figures.”98
Technical Sergeant Herschel Grice, who in 1947 was a ground maintenance crew chief assigned to the 715th Bomb Squadron at Roswell Army Air Field, was on Maj. Marcel’s intelligence team. He says that Marcel told him that he had seen the alien bodies—Marcel described them as “white rubbery figures.”99
On Monday, July 7, 1947, Lt. Gov. (later U.S. Senator) Joseph Montoya called the father of his friend, resident of Roswell, Ruben Anaya, trying to reach Ruben. When Ruben called Montoya back, Montoya told Ruben that he was at the big hangar on the Roswell AAF and pleaded with Ruben to get him out of there in a hurry. Ruben went to the base with his brother Pete and two others to pick up his friend. On the ride from the base, Montoya kept saying that “they” were not human. The men went to Pete’s house, where Montoya said, “There was a flying saucer.” He said that he saw “four little men” and that one of them was alive. (He said he heard it moaning.) Ruben and Pete told UFO researchers that Montoya had said that there were four aliens, but Pete’s wife thought that he’d said two. (Carey and Schmitt believe that there were four.) Montoya described skinny creatures that were about 3½ feet tall. He said that the creatures’ eyes were large and had a tear-drop shape. The creatures had large heads. The mouth was small, “like a knife cut across a piece of wood.” They wore silver, one-piece suits. They had four fingers on each hand. “They're not from this world!” Montoya said.
On the morning of July 8th, Montoya told the Anayas that the authorities had sent everything to Texas, and that the aliens themselves were in the hospital.
In later years, John Anaya, who was the son of Pete and Mary Anaya, joined then Sen. Montoya’s staff. John asked Montoya if his parents’ story was true. Montoya said it was true, but if John were to tell anyone, he’d deny it.100
Miriam “Andrea” Bush was the secretary of the administrator of the RAAF hospital, Lt. Colonel Harold M. Warne. She came to her parent’s home one day and became upset and cried. She described how Col. Warne had taken her into an examination room where there were creatures lying on gurneys. The beings were small, like children, and had grayish to brown skin. Their heads were large, and their eyes were large and remained open. One of the creatures moved.
Miriam said she would never again speak about what she had seen. Her brother and sister sensed that she had been threatened.101
Later in life, Miriam apparently became paranoid, and died in 1989, officially the victim of suicide.)102
Elias “Eli” Benjamin was, in July of 1947, a private first class assigned to the 390th Air Service Squadron at the Roswell Army Air Field. He had a Top Secret clearance, and guarded the “Silverplates” (the atom bomb carrying B-29s). He also worked as a recovery specialist, a position which required him to participate in the response to plane crashes. On Monday, July 7, 1947, he was sent to Hangar P-3 for guard duty. When he arrived at the hangar, he was chosen to be in charge of the detail. (He later was informed that the officer to whom he was supposed to report had gone to pieces after having seen the bodies.) Benjamin was shown three or four gurneys. On each gurney was an object covered by a sheet. He was told to deliver the gurneys to the base hospital. One of the things moved under the sheet. As the gurneys were being loaded into the truck, one of them slipped causing the sheet to fall off and exposing a being with a grayish face and large, hairless head. Benjamin could discern that it was not human.
Benjamin accompanied the gurneys to the base hospital. At the hospital, a group of medical and other officers took the sheet off one of the gurneys. Benjamin could see a small person with a large, egg-shaped head, and slanted eyes on the gurney. It had two holes for a nose and a small slit for a mouth. He thought it was alive. Later, Benjamin heard that the living alien was taken to Texas or Ohio.103
When Major Edwin Easley, former provost marshal at the Roswell AAF in 1947, lay dying in 1992, his granddaughter brought as a gift to his bedside a copy of UFO Crash at Roswell, by Randle and Schmitt. He sighed, “Ohh, the creatures!” (He had previously told his daughters and granddaughter that he had participated in the incident.)104
Sarah Mounce, the widow of Pvt. Francis “Frank” Cassidy, an MP assigned to the 1395th Military Police Company at the RAAF in 1947, said that her husband, shortly before he died in 1976, said that he had guarded Hangar P-3 and saw the bodies.105
Shortly before her husband’s death, the wife of Cpl. Robert J. Lida, who in 1947 was an MP in the 1395th, after seeing a TV show about the Roswell UFO crash, asked her husband if it was true. He said that he supposed it was time to tell her about it. He said that it was true, and that he had been ordered to stand guard at Hangar #3, and that while standing guard, he looked inside and saw wreckage and small bodies.106
Sgt. Homer G. Rowlette, Jr., was assigned to the 603rd Air Engineering Squadron at the Roswell base at the time of the incident. He had helped in the clean-up. He told his son, Larry, and his daughter, Carlene, that the story was true. (He told Carlene just weeks before he died, as he lay on a gurney before an operation.) He told Larry that he had seen three little people that had large heads, and that at least one of them was still alive.107
Chavez County Sheriff George Wilcox’s widow, Inez, told her granddaughter, Barbara, that the sheriff went to the site, where he saw a burned area and debris. He saw four “space beings,” one of whom was alive, with large heads. They were dressed in suits made of a silk-like material. Barbara told UFO investigators that if her husband had said that it happened, then it did.108
In 1947, Lt. Col. Marion “Black Mac” Magruder was attending the Air War College, Maxwell Field in Montgomery, Alabama. The class members were considered the “best and the brightest.” They were to obtain advanced training at the college. On his deathbed, Col. Magruder related this story to his family:
In mid-to-late July of 1947, the entire class was flown to Wright Field, where they were told about the retrieval of an extraterrestrial craft that crashed near Roswell. They were shown some of the wreckage. Then they were taken to another room, where they were shown a live alien. They were told that it had survived the crash. The alien was less than 5 feet tall, “human-like” but with large eyes, long arms, and a large, hairless head. Its mouth was a mere slit. It had a nose consisting of two small holes and had two small holes for ears. Magruder described the being as being “squiggly.” Magruder told his son, Mike, (to whom he had told the story before) and his granddaughter that there was no doubt that the creature “came from another planet.” He said that the alien later died—as a result of the military experiments performed on it, he believed.109
First Lt. Walter Haut, the public information officer for the 509th Bomb Group at the Roswell AAF who had sent out the news release about the recovered disk, stated in an affidavit released after his death that a flying saucer did indeed crash, and that pieces of the wreckage had been passed around at a staff meeting which he attended. He stated that Col. Blanchard took him to Building 84, a B-29 hangar that was heavily guarded. After entering the hangar, he saw the recovered space ship and, from a distance, he could see bodies. He stated that the bodies were covered except for the heads—he could not discern any features. The heads appeared to be larger than normal, and the bodies that the canvas was covering seemed to be about the size of 10-year-old children. Haut stated that, in describing the creatures, Blanchard would later gesture with his arm, indicating that the beings were about 4 feet tall. Haut states in the affidavit that a temporary morgue was set up to receive the bodies.110
Maj. Patrick H. Saunders, who was the Roswell AAF base adjutant in 1947, shortly before he died, bought a number of copies of the paperback edition of The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell by Kevin Randle and Don Schmitt. On the flyleaf of this book, Randle and Schmitt describe how the cover-up and cleanings were accomplished. It explains how records were altered and serial numbers were changed. It describes how the cleanup was done by MPs brought in from different locations so that the individuals involved would be less likely to know each other and talk about it together. It says, “after the impact site was cleaned, the soldiers debriefed, and the bodies and craft removed, silence fell.”
Saunders wrote the following note above this text in each copy and mailed the books to close friends and family: “Here’s the truth and I still haven’t told anybody anything!”111
There was a second site near the Foster ranch debris field— Mac Brazel found alien bodies there:
During the military activity on the Foster ranch, trucks carrying spotlights were seen at night going to the other site.112
Mac Brazel’s nearest neighbors were Floyd and Loretta Proctor. Their son, Dee, was with Mac when Mac discovered the debris field.
In 1994, Dee took his mother to a second site about 2½ miles east of the debris field, telling her that this was where Mac found “something else.”113
Sydney “Jack” Wright, the son of a local hired hand, said that he, with rancher Thomas Edington’s two sons and a daughter of rancher Truman Pierce, were able to get to a second location.114 He said that there were the bodies of small, big-headed, big-eyed creatures there. He claimed that Mac was there also.115
When Mac Brazel brought samples of the wreckage he had found on the ranch into Roswell, he went to the office of Sheriff Wilcox. While Brazel was there, Frank Joyce, an announcer for radio station KGFL in Roswell, called the office looking for news. Wilcox handed the phone to Brazel, and Brazel spoke to Joyce. Years later, Joyce told a UFO researcher about this conversation, but withheld important details.116 Finally, in May, 1998, he told the full story to Thomas Carey and Donald Schmitt. Joyce told them that Brazel spoke of having found another site near the debris field, a site where there were dead “little people,” “unfortunate little creatures.” Brazel spoke about a horrible stench. “THEY’RE NOT HUMAN!” he insisted before slamming the phone down.117
On July 7th (while Maj. Marcel and Capt. Cavitt did their work at the ranch—Cavitt leaving early), someone came to the ranch, got Brazel, and took him back to Roswell, to the home of Walt Whitmore, Sr., the majority owner of radio station KGFL. On the evening of the 7th, using a wire recorder, newsman (and minority owner of KGFL) “Jud” Roberts interviewed Brazel.118
Early in the morning on July 8th, the Army came to Whitmore’s house and confiscated the wire recording and took Brazel into custody. On July 9th, Brazel was escorted by military personnel to The Roswell Daily Record, The Morning Dispatch, and Roswell radio stations KGFL and KSWS where he gave interviews, now telling a new story: what he’d found, he said now, was only a weather balloon.119
Brazel was held by the military for 4 days to a week. He was interrogated, given a physical, and denied use of a phone.120
When the military brought Brazel to KGFL to tell his new story, Frank Joyce was able to have a private conversation with Brazel. Joyce asked Brazel about the “little green men” that Brazel had told him about before. Brazel answered that they were not green.121
Fawn Fritz overheard her grandfather, Mac Brazel say, “…those poor unfortunate creatures. It wasn’t anything anyone would ever want to see. Thank God you didn’t.”122
On the evening of July 7, 1947, PFC Ed Sain, of the 390th Air Service Squadron at the RAAF and his friend, Cpl. Raymond Van Why were driven into a rural area of Lincoln County, New Mexico (to the body site discovered by Mac Brazel). When they arrived at the site, they were told to stand guard there. They were told to shoot any intruders.123
According to Sain’s son, Stephen, his father’s task was to guard the bodies at the site. He called the beings “little green men.” Sain told Stephen that the ship [which he must’ve seen at a different location?] was “the strangest thing he had ever seen…”124
Raymond Van Why told his wife that he guarded the site where a spacecraft, a disc, had crashed. (This helps to verify Sain’s account.)125
Sgt. Le Roy Wallace, an MP in the 390th Air Service Squadron, was sent to a crash site near corona to assist in loading the bodies. When he got home, his clothes smelled terribly. He and his wife burned them. He washed his hands 10 times a day. For two weeks, he wore gloves when he ate, because the smell lingered on his body126
Photographic specialist, Sgt. Frederick Benthal was stationed in Washington, D.C., at the Anacosta Naval Air Station. In early July, 1947, he and a friend, Cpl. Al Kirkpatrick were sent to Roswell. From Roswell, they were taken by truck to a site north of town. On route, they put on rubberized suits. They arrived at a site where a number of tents had been set up. Kirkpatrick was put on another truck and taken to another site, presumably the debris field that Brazel had discovered. Benthal was taken into one of the tents, where he was given the task of photographing several small bodies. He said that the creatures were thin and had large heads and dark skin.127
Cpl. Leo Ellingsworth, who was assigned to 830th Bomb Squadron at Roswell, told his niece, Monte Dalton, that he participated in the cleanup of the wreckage. He and others spent the night walking shoulder-to-shoulder picking up debris. He told his niece that he had seen three “little men.”128
Sgt.Homer G. Rowlette, Jr., who had told his son and daughter that he had seen the aliens (see above), also told his son that there were 3 sites, one of which was just north of Roswell. The other two, he said, were located near the town of Corona.129
Therefore, there was a second site near the Foster ranch debris field—Mac Brazel found alien bodies there.130
There was an “impact site,” much closer to Roswell, and alien bodies were found there too:
On July 8, 1947 (probably), Lydia Sleppy, secretary at radio station KOAT in Albuquerque, N.M., got a call from the general manager and part owner of KSWS (KOAT’s sister station) in Roswell, John McBoyle. McBoyle wanted Sleppy to transmit an urgent news story to the AP via teletype. His story: a crashed “flying saucer” had been found near Roswell. McBoyle went on to compare the ship to a “big crumpled dishpan.” He also reported that he’d heard about “little men” having been aboard the saucer.
Sleppy started typing out the story on her teletype machine, but a bell rang on the machine signaling that her transmission was being interrupted. McBoyle started to talk with somebody. He told Sleppy that he’d get right back to her (but he did not). A message from the FBI came in over the teletype: ATTENTION ALBUQUERQUE: DO NOT TRANSMIT THIS MESSAGE. STOP COMMUNICATION IMMEDIATELY. NATIONAL SECURITY MATTER. (C&S) or ATTENTION ALBUQUERQUE: DO NOT TRANSMIT. REPEAT DO NOT TRANSMIT THIS MESSAGE. STOP COMMUNICATION IMMEDIATELY. (B&M) or “This is the FBI, you will cease transmitting.” (F&B—interview with Sleppy)131
Notes
83. R&S pp.91-3; C&S 132-3
84. R&S pp.92-3; C&S pp.133-5
85. F&B p.125
86. C&S p.205
87. R&S pp.93-5
88. C&S p.205
89. Sappho Henderson, Pappy Henderson’s wife. F&B p.127
90. Mary Kathryn Groode, Pappy's daughter F&B p.127
91. Beverly Bean, Melvin Brown's daughter. C&S pp.127, 143, 200; R&S p.90-1
92. C&S p.200
93. Elaine Vegh, Rasmussen's cousin. R&S p. 91; C&S p.200
94. Arthur Exon. R&S p.109
95. Exon. R&S p.110; C&S p.194
96. Exon. C&S p.195
97. C&S p.78
98. C&S p.80
99. Herschel Grice. C&S p.79
100. C&S pp.83-91
101. George Bush, Miriam’s brother. C&S p.119-122
102. Jean Bush, Miriam’s sister, Patricia bush. C&S pp.122-3
103. Elias Benjamin. (Ms Benjamin states that her husband told the story to her in 1949.) C&S pp.136-9
104. Nancy Strickland. C&S pp.197-8
105. Sarah Mounce, C&S p.198
106. Wanda Lida. C&S p.198
107. Larry Rowlett. C&S p.199
108. Barbara Dugger. C&S pp.201-2
109. C&S pp.203-6
110. Walter Haut. C&S pp.214-7
111. C&S pp.198, 225-6
112. Loretta Proctor. C&S p.51
113. Loretta Proctor. C&S p.46
114. Sydney Wright. C&S pp.46-7
115. Hope Baldra. C&S p.53
116. C&S pp.56-9, R&S p.39
117. Frank Joyce. C&S pp.57-9
118. C&S p.69; R&S p.71; B&M pp.87-8
119. R&S p.71, 78; F&B pp.136-7; C&S pp.40, 61
120. F&B pp.136-7, C&S p.39
121. Frank Joyce. C&S p.61; R&S p.79
122. Fawn Fritz. C&S p.76
123. Edward Sain C&S pp.128-9
124. Stephen Sain. C&S p.129
125. Mrs. Raymond Van Why. C&S p.129
126. Mrs. Wallace. C&S p.130
127. Frederick Benthal's notarized statement. C&S pp.130-1
128. Monte Dalton. C&S p.132
129. Larry Rowlette. C&S p.199
130. inferred from the above
131. Lydia Sleppy, Merle Tucker. C&S p.60; B&M pp.14-6; F&B p.77; R&S pp.207-8
Now, here’s the third part of my argument:
There was an impact site, a different location than the debris field, and there was a crashed spaceship found there:
Brig. General Arthur E. Exon, who in July of 1947 was a lt. colonel stationed at Wright Field, and who later (1964) became base commander of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, told UFO researchers that there was a site other than the Foster Ranch debris field location where “the main body of the spacecraft” had been found, “where they did say there were bodies.”132
Joseph Montoya, Lt. Governor of New Mexico (and later U.S. senator) who saw the alien bodies on the Roswell AAF told his friends, Ruben and Pete Anaya, that the government had retrieved the alien craft. He said “There was a flying saucer. They say it moves like a platter—a plane without wings.” He called it “un plato muy grande con una machina[sic] in la media” (“a very big saucer with a machine in the middle of it”). It is not known whether he saw the ship, or was merely told about it.133
Sgt. Homer G. Rowlette, Jr., who had participated in the clean-up at the impact site, told his son, Larry, that the ship itself was “somewhat circular.”134
First Lt. Walter Haut, the public information officer for the 509th Bomb Group at the Roswell AAF, who had put out the press release about the recovered disk, stated in his affidavit that, in addition to the debris field (on the Foster ranch), about 75 miles NW of Roswell, there was a second site (the impact site)about 40 miles north of Roswell. Haut related that Blanchard had taken him to Building 84, a B-29 hangar that was heavily guarded. After entering the hangar, he could see the craft itself, which he said had been found north of Roswell. He described the object as being about 12 to 15 feet long, somewhat smaller in width, and about 6 feet high. He said it was egg-shaped and appeared metallic. He said that he did not see any windows, or any wings. He could see no tail section or landing gear.135
Richard Talbert, a paperboy for the Roswell Daily Record, said that one day in early July, 1947, at about 3 or 3:30 P.M., a military convoy came through downtown Roswell. There was an 18-wheel low-boy or flatbed trailer, escorted by jeeps carrying MPs. On the low-boy, and covered by a tarp, was an oval-shaped object. A loose flap allowed the object to be seen: it was silver, 4-5 feet wide, 12 feet long, and 5-7 feet high. It had a dome, and was damaged at one end.136
Paperboy Bob Rich also saw the convoy come through the center of Roswell.137
Young Paul McFerrin, with friends Floyd Carter, Lloyd Carter, and Charlie Webb, saw a military flatbed, carrying an egg-shaped object under a tarp, go through town. The truck was escorted by jeeps with MPs in them.138
While Jobie MacPherson was working on a roof, he saw the convoy, a flatbed truck escorted by jeeps, go by. He saw twisted metal and something conical on the flatbed.139
PFC Rolland Menagh was an MP assigned to the 390th Air Services Squadron at the Roswell AAF. He told his sons about his involvement in the incident. He said that he was among those who guarded the impact site. He said that he saw the ship, which was round or egg-shaped. Menagh described how the spaceship was put onto an 18-wheeler under a tarp and driven to the air base through the center of Roswell. He was in one of the jeeps that escorted the truck.140
Staff Sgt. Earl V. Fulford was, in July, 1947, an aircraft mechanic and forklift operator with a top secret clearance in the 603rd Air Engineering Squadron at the Roswell AAF. Fulford told researchers that, one day (July 8th, 1947) during the time of all the talk in town about the crash and bodies, at the end of his shift at 4 p.m., Fulford saw a tractor-trailer as it came into the base. He said that the tractor-trailer was pulling a low-boy trailer on which was a tarp-covered object roughly as big as, and having a shape similar to, a Volkswagen Beetle. The driver was Fulford’s friend, George Houck. Fulford asked Houck where he’d been. Houck said, “Up north.” Fulford asked what he had under the tarp. Houck said that he couldn’t tell him what it was, and drove into Hangar P-3.141
UFO researchers Carey and Schmitt talked with George Houck in 2005. At first he said he did not remember Earl Fulford. Then he remembered Fulford, but claimed not to remember the incident involving the tarp.142
Fulford gave his old friend, Houck, a call. When Fulford raised the subject of the tarp-covered object, Houck said that there were some things that shouldn’t be discussed, and hung up. In subsequent phone conversations with Fulford, Houck would only say that he could not remember.143
Recall that Lydia Sleppy states that John McBoyle, in his brief phone call, reported that a flying saucer had crashed. He had seen, or been told about, the craft.144
My Main Argument
In general, then, (a)if it is true that a large number of witnesses confirmed (directly to researchers or indirectly to researchers via close family members) the exotic, otherworldly, nature of the crashed object, the properties of the debris, the bodies, and the ship itself, and the witnesses included a large proportion of the responsible, respectable, level-headed people who would be expected to have been most centrally involved, then the object was in fact exotic, otherworldly.
(b)As the statements composing my collection of statements above show, many witnesses, including a large portion of the highly respected, level-headed people who have the connections that they claimed to have, and who would be expected to have been centrally involved, have confirmed that the wreckage was exotic, otherworldly. Many, Jesse Marcel, Jr., Bill Brazel, Frankie Rowe, Phyllis McGuire, and Walt Whitmore, Jr., are the sons and daughters of those most intimately involved. Many of the witnesses have or had held positions of substantial responsibility. Major Jesse Marcel, for instance, was the base security officer of Roswell Army Air Field, which housed the world’s only atomic bomb group at that time.145 After the crash event, Marcel was promoted from major to lieutenant colonel. He was then assigned to an important data-collecting mission to find evidence that the U.S.S.R. had set off a nuclear bomb. Marcel told researchers, “I wrote the very report that President Truman read on the air declaring Russia had exploded an atomic device.”146 Lt. Haut, the base public information officer was a trusted aid and friend of Col. Blanchard, the Roswell AAF base commander.147 Gen. Exon was, in 1964, to become base commander of Wright-Patterson AFB, where the materials and bodies were said to have been shipped in 1947. Counter Intelligence Corps noncommissioned officer, Bill Rickett, worked for Capt. Cavitt. Maj. Saunders was the base adjutant. (c)Therefore, the materials that were recovered at Roswell in July of 1947, the bodies, and the ship itself were exotic, otherworldly. [a,b,c 1]
Now, here’s another argument that many would make—I'll adopt it provisionally:
(a)If the materials were exotic, and there were exotic bodies and there was an exotic craft recovered, then an alien spacecraft crashed and left debris at the Foster Ranch, and at the other sites, in July, 1947. (b)We’ve seen that the materials were exotic, and there were exotic bodies and there was an exotic craft recovered.(c)Therefore, an alien spacecraft crashed and left the debris on the Foster Ranch. [a,b,c 1]
Notes
132. Exon. C&S p.194; R&S p.110
133. C&S p.88
134. Larry Rowlette. C&S p.199
135. Walter Haut. C&S p.216
136. Richard Talbert. C&S p.99
137. May Rich (Bob Rich’s widow). C&S p.99
138. Paul McFerrin. C&S p.99
139. Jobie MacPherson. C&S pp.99-100
140. Michael Menagh and Rolland Menagh, Jr. C&S pp.100-1
141. Earl Fulford. C&S pp.101-3
142. C&S p.103
143. C&S p.104
144. Lydia Sleppy. C&S p.60
145. F&B p.9
146. F&B p.17
147. C&S p.212
SKEPTICAL REPLY 1—THE “MILITARY DOCUMENTS” ARGUMENTS
I can imagine the skeptic attempting to counter my argument this way:
Skeptic. You say (here) that the materials and bodies were exotic and otherworldly. But certain contemporary military documents show that what you say cannot be true: For instance, there is The Twining Letter to Schulgen, Sept. 23, 1947: In a letter dated Sept. 23, 1947 (less than 3 months after the Roswell events) signed by Lt. General Nathan Twining, Commander, Air Materiel Command (AMC) at Wright Field, sent to Brigadier General George Schulgen, chief of the Air Intelligence Requirement Division at the Pentagon, Twining says, “Due consideration must be given [to] the lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash-recovered exhibits which would undeniably prove the existence of these objects.” [see J p. 6] [Actually, the letter was written for General Twining by Col. Howard McCoy, Director of the Intelligence Division (T-2) of AMC.] (a)If Twining had known of any alien materials recovered at Roswell, he would not have implied, in a letter such as this to the Pentagon, that no such evidence existed. (b)But he did imply this. (c)So, Twining did not know about any such materials. [abc 4] (d)But if any such materials had been recovered, Twining, as commander of AMC at Wright Field, would have known about it. (e)Therefore, contrary to your statement that the materials were exotic, there was in fact no recovery of exotic materials at Roswell. [d,c,e 4]1
You say above (at a) that if Twining had known of any alien materials recovered, he wouldn’t have written a letter implying that no such evidence existed. To this claim I would respond that it’s important to look at the historical context of the Twining letter: In the summer of 1947, Lt. Col. George Garrett, in the Pentagons Air Force Office of Intelligence Requirements—Collections (AFOIR-CO), was given the task of collecting UFO information. In about September, 1947, the Pentagon started transferring its UFO files to Alfred C. Loedding at Wright-Patterson Air Force Bases Intelligence Division (T-2).
In early July, Col. Garrett and the FBI had been ordered to be alert for information about the saucers, but after only two weeks, the pressure suddenly and completely disappeared. This strange “silence from Topside” “led Garrett and his FBI liaison, S. W. Reynolds, to conclude that not only ‘the high brass appeared to be totally unconcerned,’ but that ‘there were objects seen which somebody in the government knows all about.’”1a
Garret prepared an “estimate of the situation,” that would put forth a best guess intelligence analysis of the flying disk phenomenon. Still completely puzzled by the Silence from Topside, Garrett sent this estimate to Lt. General Nathan Twining, at Wright-Patterson, to get a response from Twining’s technical experts. This communication was essentially a query about whether or not Garrett and Reynolds should continue assiduously to collect UFO reports. Twining, upon receipt of the estimate, had McCoy draft a response to Garrett. The September 23, 1947 letter to Brig. General George Schulgen (Col. Garrett's superior at the Pentagon), signed by Twining, was this response. Thus, the letter was written in order to advise Colonel Garrett and the FBI, that Wright-Patterson believed that the saucers are real, not built by us, and that Garrett and the FBI should continue their UFO work. It served also to suggest to Gen. Schulgen that a project be set up at Wright-Patterson to collect and analyze UFO reports (which was done—this is the genesis of Project Sign).1b
(a)If Garrett and Reynolds had had no need to know about the Roswell debris, then McCoy, even if he had known about the recovery of exotic debris near Roswell, would not have mentioned in it the Roswell materials, and Gen. Twining, even if he had known about such debris, would have approved the misleading letter. And the letter could be marked ‘Secret.’ (b)There was, in fact, no need for Garrett or Reynolds to know about any crashed UFO to do their jobs. (c)So, it is distinctly possible that both Twining and McCoy knew about the Roswell materials, yet would nevertheless have sent a letter to Gen. Schulgen that implied that no such evidence existed. [a,b,c MP]
I can then imagine the skeptic’s response:
Skeptic. Twining and McCoy might have omitted mention of the Roswell materials, but the statement “Due consideration must be given [to] the lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash-recovered exhibits” clearly implies that no such exhibits exist. This is tantamount to a lie, and the government does not lie to protect secrets.
The skeptic says here that the government would not lie to protect secrets. But a cover story was put out claiming that the Trinity Site nuclear explosion in July of 1945 was an ammunition dump exploding. And, in fact, the Air Force admitted that the July 9, 1947 weather balloon story was a lie—to cover up, they said, the Mogul story. All this shows that the government will, in fact, lie to protect important secrets.2
Another, similar, argument by the skeptic:
Skeptic. Let’s look at a second document3: in the minutes of the U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board conference of March 17 and 18, 1948, Colonel Howard McCoy, Chief of Intelligence (“T-2”) for Air Materiel Command, at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, speaks about intelligence operations at Air Materiel Commands T-2, and says:
“We have a new project—Project Sign—which may surprise you as a development from the so-called mass hysteria of the past summer when we had all the unidentified flying objects or discs. This cannot be laughed off.…I can’t even tell you how much we would give to have one of those crash in an area so that we could recover whatever they are.” [Emphasis added]
(a)If the words of this quote, attributed to McCoy, clearly convey ignorance of any recovered exotic materials, then we can say with confidence that McCoy did not, in fact, know of any such materials. (b)These words do, in fact, (through implication) convey ignorance of such exotic materials. (c)So, McCoy did not know of any such materials.[a,b,c 1] But Wright-Patterson was where any recovered debris from any sort of foreign craft would be taken and subjected to technical analysis. (d)So, if alien materials had been recovered from a crashed saucer in 1947, then they would have been taken there.
Now, (e)if any such alien debris had been taken to Wright-Patterson, then Colonel McCoy, as Chief of Intelligence of AMC, would have known about it. All this means that (f)if alien materials had been recovered, then McCoy would’ve known about it. [d,e,f 6] But, since he didn’t know about it (see c), we can be sure that (g)no alien materials had been recovered in New Mexico in 1947. [f,c,g 4]4
The skeptic says (at e) that if any such alien debris had been taken to Wright-Patterson, then Colonel Howard McCoy, as Chief of Intelligence of AMC would have known about it. But if exotic materials had been found near Roswell in 1947, it is possible that, since the matter may well have been deemed a laboratory and technology issue, it would have been sent to T-3, the Engineering and Technology Division at Wright-Patterson, and not to T-2 and Colonel McCoy. If the materials were sent to T-3, then Colonel McCoy, of T-2, might not have been told about it. Therefore, even if exotic materials had been found near Roswell, Colonel McCoy might not have known about it.
Again, the skeptic says (at a) that If the words of this quote, attributed to McCoy, clearly convey ignorance of any recovered exotic materials, then we can say with confidence that McCoy did not, in fact, know of any such materials. But recall that Colonel McCoy was Chief of Intelligence for Air Materiel Command at Wright-Patterson AFB. Colonel McCoy’s goal, in speaking to this group of about 39 men of the Scientific Advisory Board, was to convince the Board that ten scientists should be added to the AMC staff and that a new Applied Research Section should be established within the AMC. To further this goal, McCoy was trying to impress the Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) by describing what the AMC was accomplishing at Wright-Patterson. (The SAB chairman Theodore von Karman, later, did in fact write to the USAF Director of Research and Development recommending that the 10 new positions be created, and the new section established at the AMC.) (h)Therefore, it was not a situation where the members of the board had been determined to have a need to know in any comprehensive way about what AMC knew about flying saucers.
(i)Now, if the members of the Board had no need to know in a comprehensive way about flying saucers, and so no need to know about any recovered materials, then McCoy, even if he knew about such materials, would not have made mention of them. (j)So, even if he’d known about a Roswell saucer crash, he would not have made mention of it to the board, and so, his statement does not show that he didn’t know about such a crash.5 [i,h,j 1]
The skeptic says (at a) that if the words of this quote, attributed to McCoy, clearly convey ignorance of any recovered exotic materials, then we can say with confidence that McCoy did not, in fact, know of any such materials. But the following argument shows that this is not necessarily true at all. It seems true to say that (k)if the SAB had had members who lacked top secret clearances, and if the subject of any recovery of exotic materials had been classified top secret, then McCoy, even if he’d known about such materials, wouldn't have mentioned it at the SAB meeting. (l)In fact, apparently, the SAB indeed did have members who lacked top secret clearances at that time. (m)And, surely the subject of the recovery of any exotic materials would have been classified top secret (at least). So, (n)McCoy, even if he’d known about such materials, wouldn’t have mentioned it at the meeting. [k,l,m,n 3] In such a case, the quote would have conveyed ignorance, yet McCoy would have known about the materials.6
Again, the skeptic says (at a) that if the words of this quote, attributed to McCoy, clearly convey ignorance of any recovered exotic materials, then we can say with confidence that McCoy did not, in fact, know of any such materials. But here’s another possibility that shows that this is not necessarily true: This document was, apparently, originally marked secret, yet information about a crash at Roswell would surely have been classified, at least, top secret. It is possible that McCoy had spoken about the Roswell crash at the conference, and that everyone in the room understood that this material would be omitted from the minutes. The recorded statement quoted by Skeptic, then, would have been a “throw-out,” designed to substitute, in the merely secret document, for the more highly classified words actually uttered. Therefore, again, it is not necessarily true that McCoy’s quote as represented in the document shows that he did not know about a Roswell crash.7
Skeptic. You say (here) that if the materials were sent to T-3, then Colonel McCoy might not have been told about it. But surely, McCoy would have been let in on the secret—he would have been viewed, by those in the know, as a patriot, a soldier, and a good old boy. I still maintain that if there was exotic debris, then McCoy would’ve known about it.
Again, you say (here) that if the materials were sent to T-3, then Colonel McCoy might not have been told about it. But an Oct. 11, 1948 memorandum from Col. Brooke Allen confirms that if the Engineering Department had a saucer, the Intelligence Department would not only know about it, they would be involved in its analysis—this is just common sense.8
You say (at n) that even if he’d known about a Roswell saucer crash, he would not have made mention of it to the board. This may be true, but he didn’t, in his statement, merely omit mention of any exotic debris; rather, he strongly implied that there were no such materials. This amounts to a lie, and the government, though it might not disclose sensitive facts, would not actually lie—thus McCoy would not have lied.
The skeptic says here that McCoy surely would have been let in on the secret. Maybe they would have let McCoy in on it, but maybe not. All I have to do is show that they might not have, and that it’s distinctly possible that McCoy didn’t know about the exotic materials.
The skeptic says that the government would not lie to protect secrets. But, as I noted above, a cover story was put out claiming that the Trinity Site nuclear explosion in July of 1945 was an ammunition dump exploding. And, in fact, the Air Force admitted that the July 9, 1947 weather balloon story was a lie—to cover up, they said, the Mogul story. All this shows that the government will, in fact, lie to protect important secrets.9
Skeptic. Let’s look at a third document: a letter sent by McCoy to Cabell, dated Nov. 8, 1948: You say (here) that the materials were exotic, but the following argument refutes that claim:
(a)If McCoy had known about such a crash, he would not imply in a letter to Maj. General C. P. Cabell, Director of Intelligence for the AF at the Pentagon, that there was no such crash. (b)Yet he did just that: in a letter sent by McCoy to Cabell, dated Nov. 8, 1948, McCoy says that there was “no conclusive proof” that the flying disks were real aircraft, and that no physical evidence “such as that which would result from a crash” was on hand. (c)Therefore, McCoy didn’t know that there was a saucer crash at Roswell.[a,b,c 4] (d)Furthermore, if exotic materials had been recovered at Roswell, then Col. Howard McCoy, Wright-Patterson Director of T-2 (Intelligence Division), would have known about it. (e)Therefore, again contrary to your statement that the materials were exotic, no exotic materials had in fact been recovered at Roswell.[d,c,e 4]10
I’ve already argued (here) against the skeptic’s point (here—at e) that McCoy would've known—but let me make another point:
First, a word about Project Sign: As I noted above, about September, 1947, the Pentagon began transferring its saucer documents to civilian intelligence engineer, Alfred C. Loedding. In February, 1948, a group made up of Loedding and a few of his colleagues was formally titled “Project Sign.” This is the top-down command hierarchy at Wright Field in 1948, leading down to Project Sign:
Air Materiel Command (AMC), under Lt. General Twining
Intelligence Division, called T-2, under Col. McCoy (the Engineering and Technology Division was T-3)
Intelligence Analysis Division, under Col. William Clingerman.
Analysis Section (MCIAT)
Special Projects branch, under Maj. Raymond A. Llewellyn
Project Sign
Project Sign was headed by Capt. Robert R. Sneider. The other members of Project Sign were:
Lt. Howard W. Smith
George W. Towles
Maj. Llewellyn (who did drop-in work)
John (Red) Honaker (joined later, from Clingerman’s office)
Albert B. Deyarmond (civilian engineer)
Alfred Loedding (on loan from T-3)
Lawrence Truettner (civilian engineer)
McCoy did not write the letter to Cabell dated Nov. 8, 1948, although as head of T-2, he signed off on it. “An MCIAT designator on the letter of November 8, 1948 tells us that someone in the Analysis section office wrote it, in this particular instance Albert B. Deyarmond (A.B.D.),” a member of the Project Sign team. “Deyarmond wrote this letter at the behest of the Project Sign team.…The letter, therefore, was the product of the knowledge and interests of Sneider, Loedding, Truettner, and Deyarmondand, and was, at the least, unobjected to by Clingerman and McCoy.”11 It was not, then, McCoy who implied in the letter that there was no such crash. So your argument is unsound.
In response to this, the skeptic might say:
Skeptic. Granted, for arguments sake, that McCoy didn’t write this letter, and that it was written by the Project Sign team. In this case, the following argues against your point (here) that the debris and bodies was exotic: (a)If The Project Sign team had known about a saucer crash, they wouldn’t have sent a letter to Cabell implying that there was no such crash. (b)But, as you say, they did write such a letter (the Nov. 8, 1948 letter signed by McCoy). (c)So, its clear that they didn’t know about a crash.[a,b,c 4] (d)Furthermore, if there’d been a saucer crash, then the Project Sign team, a group assigned the task of investigating the disks, would’ve known about it. Since they didn’t know about it (see c), (e)there was no such crash.[d,c,e 4]
Here (at d), the skeptic claims that if there’d been a saucer crash, if exotic materials had been retrieved, then the Project Sign team would have known about it. But the following argument shows that there’s really no reason to believe that they would have known:
(f)If exotic materials had been recovered on the Foster ranch, then those in the know would no longer need to determine the nature of the disk phenomenon. But they surely would have recalled the stir caused by the Silence from Topside; i.e., by their sudden apparent lack of interest in the UFO reports, and so may well have set up Project Sign for the sole purpose of giving the impression that they were still interested. That is, if exotic material had been recovered, then Project Sign may well have been a sham. (g)And if Project Sign was a sham, then the team would’ve had no need to know about any recovered exotic materials, and so would not have known about such materials. (h)Therefore, if there’d been an exotic crash, then the Project Sign team might well not have known about it. [f,g,h 6]
Skeptic. (i)Also, as I said (here), if there’d been a saucer crash, then McCoy would’ve known about it. (j)And if McCoy had known about it, he wouldn’t have signed off on a letter to Cabell that implied there was no crash. (k)But, as you admit, he did. (l)Therefore, McCoy didn’t know about any such crash.[j,k,l 4] (m)And so, there was no saucer crash.[i,l,m 4]
But with respect to the skeptic’s point that McCoy would’ve known about any exotic materials having been recovered: as I showed above (here), it’s quite possible that McCoy did not know about the Roswell materials.
Also, the skeptic says that if McCoy had known about the alien materials, then McCoy would not have signed off on a letter to Cabell that implied that there were no retrieved materials. But this is not necessarily true. If, for instance, McCoy understood that Sign was designed to give the impression that the government was still in the dark as to the nature of the disks and wished to perpetuate that impression then, although he knew the disks were alien, he may have signed off on that letter.
Notes
1. from an argument by Kent Jeffrey: J p.6
1a. cited by Michael D. Swords, “A Different View of ‘Roswell—Anatomy of a Myth,’” Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1998, p.105: FBI. (1947). FOIAd documents package from the Federal Bureau of Investigation.Fund for UFO Research. Volume 12, FUFOR: Mt. Rainier MD.
1b. Michael D. Swords, “A Different View of ‘Roswell—Anatomy of a Myth,’” Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1998, pp.105-6
2. Robert M. Wood. “Critique of Roswell—Anatomy of a Myth”, Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 12, No 1, p.131
3. USAF-SAB 1948
4. from an argument by Kent Jeffrey: J p.6
5. adapted from Michael D. Swords, “A Different View of Roswell—Anatomy of a Myth”. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol.12, No. 1, pp.108-111
6. Swords, p.110
7. from an argument described by, but not subscribed to by, Swords, p.110
8. Kent Jeffrey, J pp.6-7
9. Robert M. Wood. “Critique of Roswell—Anatomy of a Myth”, Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 12, No 1, p.131
10. from an argument by Kent Jeffrey: J p.6
11. Swords, p.112
SKEPTICAL REPLY 2—THE “FLYING SAUCERS WOULDNT CRASH” ARGUMENT
The skeptic may argue this way:
Skeptic. You claim (here) that an alien spacecraft crashed and left the debris on the Foster Ranch. But there must be something wrong with the argument that led you to this conclusion, because in and of itself the claim is unbelievable. Consider this: two decades ago, the average engine-failure rate for commercial jetliners was higher than it is today. Today’s average rate of engine failure is very low. There is less than one engine failure for every 100,000 flight hours. In fact, the chances of two engines on the same plane failing during any given hour of flight are less than 1 in 10 billion. Similarly, today we have first-rate radar systems, which we did not have in the past, which allow pilots to circumvent thunderstorms and their associated hail and lightning. And, we have developed excellent collision avoidance systems. Also, modern systems are designed to be less and less vulnerable to operator error. It also makes sense, in general, to suppose that problems encountered by intelligent beings tend to be diminished by these beings over time.
(a)These examples and common sense shows that if a machine is the product of a highly sophisticated technology, then that machine’s reliability is very high, and the chances that it might fail are very low. The greater the sophistication of the technology, the greater the reliability will be. We can assume that if a machine is the product of an extremely sophisticated technology, then its failure rate would be near zero.
(b)Now, consider a flying machine that could make right angle turns at high speed, could travel at incredible speeds and make astonishing accelerations, could fly without wings, a craft made by creatures capable of traveling light years through vast distances of empty space in a fairly short period of time: any such flying machine must be the product of an unimaginably sophisticated technology.[All M are T] (c)Flying saucers appear to be flying machines that can make right angle turns at high speed, can travel at incredible speeds and make astonishing accelerations, can fly without wings, and, if they exist, must be craft made by creatures capable of traveling light years through vast distances of empty space, presumably in a fairly short period of time.[All S are M] (d)Therefore, any flying saucer would have to be the product of an unimaginably sophisticated technology.[All S are T. b,c,d 8-AAA1] (e)And therefore, the reliability of any flying saucer would be extremely high. It would not crash. The probability that such a machine would crash, would break down, or would collide would be about zero. Saucers don’t crash.[a,d,e 9+1] (f)So, the debris at Roswell didn’t come from a crashed saucer. (g)And, as you agree (here), if the materials were exotic, then they were from a crashed saucer. (h)Therefore, what was found at Roswell was not exotic.[g,f, h 4]1
In response to this argument, some have claimed that the skeptic’s argument in support of the notion that flying saucers would not crash is an extremely weak one, because it rests on a weak premise (at a), namely, that if a machine is the product of an extremely sophisticated technology, then its failure rate would be near zero. They say that as machines, such as aircraft, become more sophisticated, they become more reliable, but that this just means that the time to failure improves. Even sophisticated machines, they say, do still break, however, and still do fail due to operator error. Today, for example aircraft are built to withstand lightning strikes, but such a strike apparently contributed to the recent crash of a commercial jet.2
The researcher Robert Wood has mentioned four possibilities that, he says, have little to do with reliability calculations that are made ahead of time:
First, the crash could have been caused by a lightning strike (There was thunder and lightning in the area on July 2)
Second, there could have been a collision of two alien craft owing to electronic pulse resulting from the lightning.
Third, the crash could have been caused by “a near burst of a proximity-fused shell fired from a long-range radar-guided gun at White Sands Proving Ground; such weapons were in development there and then.”
Fourth, the crash might have been caused by terrestrial radar interference with the extraterrestrial craft’s electrical systems.3
To this, the skeptic might say:
Skeptic. To say that the mean time to failure improves is to say that the chances of failure are reduced. So Believer is actually agreeing with me. I don’t claim that high tech rules out failures completely; rather, what I’m saying is that a technology (perhaps millions of years old) as evinced by the supposed Roswell craft would imply chances for failure of near zero. Believer doesn’t refute this.
I, myself, am inclined to agree with the skeptic that flying saucers wouldn’t crash, but I disagree with him when he claims (at g) that if the materials were exotic, then they were from a crashed saucer. (And note that, in my original argument (here), I only provisionally agreed with the same claim.) Granted, the material wasn’t from a crashed saucer, but it still might have been exotic. For instance, the aliens may have staged the “crash.”
But the skeptic might say in response to my claim that the “crash” might have been staged:
Skeptic. It’s obviously true that if the material wasn’t from a crashed saucer, it still might have been exotic. Of course, it’s within the realm of possibility that it was staged by aliens. But when I said (at h) that it wasn’t exotic, I meant, of course, that the chance of its being exotic, alien, was miniscule, and not worth considering. Yet you seem to be suggesting not merely that the idea that it was staged is possible, but that it is actually plausible, and that’s ridiculous. Ockham’s Razor simply rules it out. You have no reason to attribute the Roswell incident to aliens.[Ockham’s Razor]
Actually, if that was all there was to my argument, then the idea of alien staging would, indeed, be ruled out by Ockham’s Razor. But don’t forget that Ockham’s razor states that the more complex explanation (the explanation that requires more novelties to be posited) is not to be chosen without necessity. But the fact that there is evidence for the materials’ otherworldliness, that the reports by solid witnesses exist, makes it necessary to choose the more complex explanation, namely, that the “crash” was staged.
In other words, you proved that there couldn’t have been a crash, yet the witness reports prove that the debris was otherworldly. The only conclusion we can make is that the “crash” was staged by otherworldly beings.
Notes
1. This argument is adapted from an argument by Kent Jeffrey: J pp.5-6. Jeffrey’s argument has been refined by the Truth Engine book editor in response to objections to Jeffrey by Stanton Friedman, “Kent Jeffrey and Roswell,” July 21, 1997.
2. Adapted from an argument by Kevin Randle: “Randle Responds to Jeffrey on Roswell,” MUFON UFO Journal, July 1997, #351, p.8
3. From an argument by Robert M. Wood. “Critique of ‘Roswell—Anatomy of a Myth’” Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.127-140
SKEPTICAL REPLY 3—THE “MEN OF THE 509TH”ARGUMENT
Here is another set of arguments that the skeptic might present against my view:
Skeptic. You say (here) that the debris was exotic, but the following argument shows that this claim is probably false:
First, we can conclude that the men of the 509th Bomb Group, which was based at Roswell in 1947, didn’t know about any such exotic materials. Here is my first argument:
In September 1996, Kent Jeffrey attended the reunion of the 509th Bomb Group in Tucson, Arizona, and was able to talk to several of the B-29 pilots who had been at Roswell in 1947. (a)If these men had told Jeffrey that the government would have been unjustified in censoring information about any recovery of exotic materials, then they believed what they said. (b)The men, in fact, did tell Jeffrey that such a thing should not be censored. In essence, they were implying that the U.S. government would, in their view, be unjustified in censoring it. (c)Therefore, they probably believed that the U.S. government would’ve been unjustified in censoring such information. [a,b,c 1] Furthermore, (d)if they fought in WWII against totalitarians, one of whose crimes was unjustified censorship, then they were strongly against unjustified censorship. (e)In fact, they did fight in WWII against totalitarians, one of whose crimes was unjustified censorship. (f)Therefore, they were strongly against unjustified censorship.[d,e,f 1] (g)If they knew about such materials, and if they believed that the U.S. government was unjustified in censoring it, and if they were strongly against unjustified censorship, then they would’ve told Jeffrey about the materials. (h)But they didn’t tell Jeffrey about any such materials. (i)Therefore, they didn’t know about any such materials.[g,c,f,h,i 5]
Here, Skeptic claims (at a) that if these men had told Jeffrey that the government would have been unjustified in censoring information about any recovery of exotic materials, then they believed what they said. But this is unproven, since it could be that if they’d known about such materials, then they might have, to throw Jeffrey off the track, said that they believed that the government would be wrong to censor such information, even though they didn’t believe it.
Second, the skeptic’s claim (at g) that “if [the men of the 509th] knew about such materials, and if they believed that the U.S. government was unjustified in censoring it, and if they were strongly against unjustified censorship, then they would’ve told Jeffrey about the materials” is flawed, because, I believe, the men might have known about the exotic materials and yet would not have told Jeffrey. These men were loyal Americans, and even if they had known about such materials, even if they’d thought that the U.S. government was unjustified in censoring the information, and even if they were strongly against unjustified censorship, they still probably would not have told Jeffrey, who had no need to know, about it. They would have equated spilling the beans with disloyalty—they would not have presumed to second guess the censors, even if they had their own views about the justifiability of censorship in this case.
My point that, even if these men had known about the exotic materials, they would not have told Jeffrey is also supported by the fact that these were all men whose disposition to keep secrets had been demonstrated: “When the 509th was formed with the purpose of dropping the atomic bombs,” the men were shown “classified” equipment and orders, and then were given a leave. During this leave, they were tracked and engaged in conversation. Those who mentioned anything “classified” were dismissed from the unit. Therefore, the men who were left in the unit were those who had taken their obligation to protect classified information very seriously.2
Here’s another argument against g: (i1)if these men had been given explicit orders not to discuss the matter of the exotic materials with anyone, then even if they’d known something, they would not have told Jeffrey about it. (i2)In fact, there’s evidence that orders did come from the strategic Air Command directing the officers of the Eighth Air Force and the 509th Bomb Group not to discuss this matter among themselves: According to Brigadier General (colonel at the time of the incident) Thomas DuBose, recorded on video tape on August 10, 1990, Major General Clements McMullen, deputy commander of SAC, called him and said, “Nobody, and I must stress this, no one was to discuss [the Roswell incident] with their wives, me, with Ramey, with anyone.”3 (i3)Therefore, even if they’d known about exotic materials, they wouldn’t have told Jeffrey about it.[i1,i2,i3 1]
For these reasons, Skeptic has failed to prove that the men did not know about any exotic materials—the men of the 509th might have known about the weird materials.
But Skeptic might try again to prove the same point:
Skeptic. My second argument to support the view that these men didn’t know about any exotic materials is this:
(j)If these men knew about such materials, and if they believed it to be more of a social scientific issue than an issue of national security, then they would’ve told Jeffrey about the materials. (k)In fact, they would’ve believed that it was more of a social or scientific issue than one of national security, (l)and, in fact, they didn’t tell Jeffrey about the recovery of any exotic materials. (m)Therefore, they probably did not know about any such materials.[j,k,l,m 5]
The skeptic here claims (at j) that “if these men knew about such materials, and if they believed it to be more of a social scientific issue than an issue of national security, then they would’ve told Jeffrey about the materials.” But for reasons I articulated above, it seems clear that even if the men of the 509th knew about the exotic materials, and even if they thought the matter was more of a social or scientific issue than one of national security, then these loyal Americans still would not have told Jeffrey about the materials.
And the skeptic says (see k) that, in fact, [the men of the 509th] would’ve believed that it was more of a social or scientific issue than one of national security. But this seems false. The men of the 509th would surely have seen the national security implications of the recovery of exotic materials, even if Jeffrey didn’t see them. Friedman points to three clear reasons to regard the matter as a national security issue: (1) the alien vehicle involved had exotic flight capability whose technology could be useful to the military; or, (2) the technology could be useful to our enemies, who might obtain it just as we had; (3) if the aliens were attacking the earth, it would be useful to know what their weapons were.4
So, again, Skeptic has failed to prove that the men did not know about the materials.
Skeptic. And this is my third argument:
(n)It’s probably true that if Jeffrey did not get the impression that the men were acting, then they did not, in fact, know anything about exotic materials. (o)Actually, Jeffrey did not get the impression that the men were acting; (p)So, probably, they did not know about any such materials.[n,o,p 1]
The skeptic says (see n) that “it’s probably true that if Jeffrey did not get the impression that the men were acting, then they did not, in fact, know anything.” But this claim is simply not proven. The men could have been good actors—part of making a cover up work is covering up convincingly.
So, the skeptic has failed once more to prove that the men of the 509th did not know about any exotic materials having been recovered from the Foster ranch.
Now he will try to prove that the incident did not happen at all:
Skeptic.(q)Therefore, for all the reasons I have given, it seems highly probable that the men did not know about any exotic Roswell materials.
Now, I can show that no exotic materials were retrieved at Roswell—the crash never happened:
(r)If the men Jeffrey talked to had said to him, “If it happened, then we would’ve known about it” then, if it happened, they probably would’ve known about it. (s)They did in fact say precisely that. They said, “If it happened, then we would’ve known about it.”
(t)Therefore, if it happened, they would’ve known about it. [r,s,t 1] Above (at q) we saw that the men probably didn’t know about any exotic materials having been recovered. (u)Therefore, It probably didn’t happen.[tqu 4]
Furthermore, the skeptic claims (see r) that “if the men Jeffrey talked to had said to him, ‘If it happened, then we would’ve known about it’ then, if it happened, they probably would’ve known about it.” This claim seems not clearly true. It might be true—it’s possible that the men knew about the exotic materials but wanted to convince Jeffrey that nothing happened; thus they would’ve denied knowing anything while pointing out that they would’ve known. But it seems that it’s also possible that they didn’t know even though it happened and they said that they would’ve known if it had happened. As Kevin Randle says, “Many military units have secrets that are shared only with those who have a need to know.” And he reminds us that "DuBose acknowledged that an order had been given."5
And, as part of this same argument, the skeptic claims (see q) that he proved that “the men probably didn’t know about any exotic materials having been recovered.” But my comments above show that this has not been proven. It’s not been proven that the men did not know.
So Skeptic fails here to prove u, that is, to prove that it probably didn't happen.
Skeptic.Here’s another argument:
(v)Probably, if such a significant and dramatic event had happened, then the men of the 509th would have discussed it among themselves (they had secret clearances). (w)And if they discussed it among themselves (i.e. one passing the information to others, etc.) then they would have come to know about the exotic materials. (x)Therefore, probably, if such a significant and dramatic event had happened, they would have known about it.[v,w,x 6] (y)But above (at q) we saw that they didn’t know about it. (z)Therefore, it probably didn’t happen.[x,y,z 4]
The skeptic claims (see v) that “probably, if such a significant and dramatic event had happened, then the men of the 509th would have discussed it among themselves.” But this is not proven. The fact that orders, it seems, had been given not to discuss the matter [see i2], and the fact that these men had been chosen for their unit because they had demonstrated that they would keep secrets (recall how the men were shown “classified” equipment and orders, and then were given a leave and tracked) argues against the idea that if the event had happened, they would’ve discussed it among themselves (though it doesn’t argue against this as strongly as it argues against their telling Jeffrey.) And, as part of this same argument, the skeptic claims (see y) that he proved that the men probably didn’t know about any exotic materials having been recovered. But my comments above show that this has not been proven. It’s not been proven that the men did not know.
Skeptic.These, then are the reasons that show that it very probably didn’t happen.1
The skeptic’s arguments in this reply fail to prove his conclusions, and my comments following his points show that his arguments contain false and unproven statements.
Notes
1. from an argument by Kent Jeffrey: J pp.7-8
2. Kevin Randle, Randle Responds to Jeffrey on Roswell MUFON UFO Journal, July 1997 #351, p.9
3. Kevin Randle: Randle Responds to Jeffrey on Roswell, MUFON UFO Journal, July 1997 #351, p.7
4. “Kent Jeffrey and Roswell” 7-21-97; and see Friedman: kent Jeffrey and Roswell, at http://ufologie.patrickgross.org/rw/a/friedmankjar.htm
5. see ac. Kevin Randle, Randle responds to Jeffrey on Roswell, MUFON UFO Journal, July 1997 #351, p.7
SKEPTICAL REPLY 4—THE “THE DISTANCES ARE TOO GREAT” ARGUMENT
Here’s another skeptical argument:
Skeptic. You say (here) that an alien spacecraft crashed and left the debris on the Foster Ranch. (a)But the distances to other stars are vast, and the chances of any stars relatively nearby supporting advanced life are slim, and travel cannot be faster that the speed of light. (b)If the distances to other stars are vast, etc., then extraterrestrial craft have not been visiting Earth. (c)Therefore, extraterrestrial craft have not been visiting Earth [b,a,c 1] and the materials recovered on the Foster ranch cannot have come from a crashed alien spaceship (or been planted there by aliens in a staged “crash”).
But, against a, it is not clear at all that science has never developed or can never develop a means for traveling faster than the speed of light (using wormholes, etc.). The chances simply seem to be 50-50 that faster-than-light travel is possible.
Also, the skeptic says (see b) that “if the distances to other stars are vast, etc., then extraterrestrial craft have not been visiting Earth.” But this is unproven. Even supposing that there is no way to travel faster than the speed of light, his point at b is still unproven. Eric Jones of Los Alamos Laboratories showed that an expanding sphere of colonized stellar systems could, even using slower-than-light vehicles, fill our entire galaxy within sixty million years. Since the universe is 16 billion years old, even if intelligent life were so rare that colonizations of the Milky Way happened only one at a time, our solar system could still have been colonized 266.7 times.
Actually, the number of times that we could be colonized by the most distant stars would be many times more than that, because it is reasonable to suppose that many not-yet colonized races on these most distant worlds would embark on colonization at about the same time, and, in fact, they would do so all during the history of the galaxy.
Furthermore, colonizers from closer stars could find us more quickly, some much more quickly. We can safely suppose that, assuming that intelligent life is fairly common, the number of times that colonizers could reach us from all parts of the galaxy over the galaxy’s history is an absolutely enormous number. We have only to presume that some logic dictates to advanced colonizers that they should be secretive in their interactions with the less advanced cultures that they discover, and we will see that some UFOs are probably alien machines.
Further discussion of this question is found here, in the General UFO section, “The ‘The Distances Are Too Great’ Argument”:
SKEPTICAL REPLY 5—THE “EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS” ARGUMENT
The following argument is of a kind often presented by skeptics:
Skeptic. Vs. your argument leading to the conclusion that the materials recovered at Roswell in July of 1947, the bodies, and the ship itself were exotic, otherworldly, I will say this: While it is true that it strains credulity that Marcel, for instance, could have been mistaken, his testimony and the other evidence in this case, as strong as it seems to be, is not strong enough to allow the inference that the debris was exotic. After all, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Here, the skeptic claims that Marcel’s testimony, and that of the others, is not strong enough as evidence because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But this is false. The “Extraordinary Claims” argument is so vague and so general, that it could probably be used convincingly, but not always legitimately, to dispose offhandedly of any and all evidence for any extraordinary claim whatever. It might be said against the present use of this principle that any good evidence for extraordinary claims is extraordinary evidence, but let us examine the principle more closely.
The principle (first articulated by Carl Sagan) is this: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But what, precisely, does “extraordinary” mean here? In the phrase “extraordinary claims,” “extraordinary” cannot simply mean “astounding” or “fascinating,” or even “unexpected;” rather, it can only mean “improbable,” and in the phrase “extraordinary evidence,” the word can only mean “unusually strong.” Thus the principle actually amounts to this:
Improbable claims require unusually strong evidence.
The principle seems clearly to be a true principle. But, thus clarified, we can see that it does not apply to these UFO questions, unless there is something improbable about the notion that exotic beings, which would most likely be extraterrestrial beings, are quasi-secretly visiting the Earth. But my argument above, in the previous skeptical reply (Skeptical Reply 4), where I point to the way in which the galaxy could’ve been colonized at less than the speed of light 266.7 times or more, shows that there is nothing improbable about this notion. (In fact, even if there were no UFO reports, the idea that extraterrestrial races were not visiting would seem to be an improbable one.) Therefore, the principle does not apply in this kind of case.
[For the general discussion of this principle, see “The ‘Extraordinary Claims’ Argument” in the Philosophical Dialectic.]
SKEPTICAL REPLY 6—THE “THE DEBRIS WAS NOT VISUALLY COMPLEX” ARGUMENT
Here’s another argument against my view:
Skeptic. Here, I will respond to your claim (here) that an alien spacecraft crashed and left the debris on the Foster Ranch: (a)If the materials discovered by Brazel were from a crash of an alien craft, then at least some of the debris would’ve been visually complex—i.e., some of this debris would have had complex shapes, or would have been composed of articulated parts. Think of the debris from a plane crash: it would contain “servos, electronic components, instruments, guidance systems,” etc. Even a chariot would have left such parts behind: axles, wheels, etc. (b)But according to all reports none of the materials discovered by Brazel were visually complex this way. (c)Therefore, the materials discovered by Brazel were not from a crash of an exotic/alien craft.[a,b,c 4] (d)If the materials were exotic, then they were from a crashed saucer. (e)Therefore, the materials were not exotic.[d,c,e 4]1
Here, the skeptic says (see a) that “If the materials discovered by Brazel were from a crash of an exotic/alien craft, then at least some of the debris would’ve been visually complex.” But his point is unproven. The Brazel debris might have been only part of the crash debris. There have been aircraft accidents where an engine was found many miles from the fuselage. The Brazel debris might have been, for instance, from parts of the fuselage, so would not contain articulated instruments.
“The Roswell scenario does not have a whole craft crash at the Brazel ranch ...”(Michael Swords)2
Kevin Randle concedes that “there is not the range of debris you would expect from a crashing craft,” but adds, “That doesn’t cover the craft and bodies found elsewhere.”3
In that case, the Brazel materials could have been from a crash of an exotic alien craft, while not being visually complex. In fact, there is evidence that alien bodies and other wreckage from inside the craft, were found just a few miles from the debris field. This evidence is found partly in the Eisenhower briefing, as delineated in Top Secret/MAJIK by Stanton Friedman—also, Randle points to “the statements by Major (later full colonel) Edwin Easley, Major (later full colonel) Patrick Saunders, Brigadier General Arthur Exon, Dr. W. Curry Holden, reporter Johnny McBoyle and many others Each spoke of the second crash site in first-hand terms.”4
Also, the skeptic here says (see d) that “if the materials were exotic, then they were from a crashed saucer.” But this statement is unproven. The material might not have been from a crash, but still might have been exotic: for instance, it might have been planted.5
Notes
1. from an argument by Kent Jeffrey: J p.10
2. Michael D. Swords, “A Different View of Roswell—Anatomy of a Myth,” p.123
3. “Randle Responds to Jeffrey on Roswell,” MUFON UFO Journal, July, 1997, Number 351, p.8
4. Kevin Randle, “Randle Responds to Jeffrey on Roswell,” MUFON UFO Journal, July 1997, Number 351, p.8. The arguments concerning alien bodies at Roswell will be left to another section.
5. see my point here, and arguments following that point.
SKEPTICAL REPLY 7—THE “IT WAS A MOGUL BALLOON” ARGUMENT, PART I
The following represents a frequently encountered argument against the notion that the Roswell debris was exotic:
Skeptic. In response to your claim that the materials recovered at Roswell in July of 1947, the bodies, and the ship itself were exotic, otherworldly, I will respond this way:
Project Mogul was a secret project, managed by New York University and Watson Labs, that launched balloons from Alamogordo Army Air Field and White Sands in New Mexico, during June and July of 1947. The purpose of these flights was to determine if Soviet nuclear tests could be detected by monitoring low-frequency sound waves in the upper atmosphere. The project team launched a number of monitoring flights during this period. The balloons through Flight 7 (July 2, 1947) consisted of clusters of 24 or more neoprene (rubber) meteorological balloons. Later flights used single balloons made of polyethylene.1 These Mogul balloons and balloon clusters carried sonobuoy microphones to pick up the sound of soviet nuclear tests.
The Mogul balloon flights were tracked in several different ways: At least some of the flights carried ML-307 radar targets so that they could be tracked by radar. These multi-faced targets (some of which were manufactured by a toy or novelty company) consisted of sheets of aluminum foil, with paper backing, supported by balsa-wood beams. According to Professor Charles Moore, the on-scene Project Engineer, these beams were coated with an Elmers-type glue for strength.2 The targets were reinforced by acetate and/or cloth tape. Moore said that some of them were assembled with tape covered with purple/pink floral patterns. At least some of the flights were tracked using radio triangulation, and so at least some of them carried radiosondes. A radiosonde is a piece of equipment that is generally used in weather balloon flights to measure pressure, altitude, temperature, etc. and to transmit the data to a receiver on the ground. The flights were also tracked visually from the ground using theodolites, or from the air, using chase aircraft. In the case of scrubbed missions, Moore says, the balloons were sent up anyway, stripped of equipment.
Dr. Albert Crary, on-site Director of Operations, kept a diary of the project. On June 3, 1947 his entry speaks of a balloon flight that was “abandoned due to cloudy skies.” The next day he wrote:
“June 4 Wed. Out Tularosa Range and fired charges between 00 and 06 this a.m. No balloon flights again on account of clouds. Flew regular sonobuoy up in cluster of balloons and had good luck on receiver on ground but poor on plane. Out with Thompson p.m. Shot charges from 1800 to 2400.” (HQ USAF, Attachment 32/Appendix 17)
This balloon flight of June 4, 1947 was never recovered. No further record exists of what it carried, and no record at all exists of its flight path. (a)It seems true to say that if, independently of consideration of the Roswell debris, we deem that it’s at least possible that the June 4 balloon carried a radar target (which would have been an ML-397 target as described above), and if it’s at least possible, again independent of the resemblance of the Roswell debris to a radar target, that its flight path took it over the Foster ranch, and if the debris is reconcilable with the ML-307 radar reflector and other parts of the Mogul train, then the June 4 balloon must
First, we have to show that it’s possible that the June 4 balloon carried a radar target: In fact, Flight 2 carried radar reflectors for tracking, but flight 5 used a radiosonde. The June 4 balloon was launched before Flight 5 (if it was a Mogul flight, the June 4 balloon would have been Flight #4).
Now, consider this possible scenario: The June 4th flight carried reflectors, and the disappearance and loss of that flight was the impetus for the team to switch from reflectors to radiosondes on Flight #5 and later flights. Such a scenario would give us an explanation (which we would otherwise lack) for the switch from reflectors to radiosondes. If a possible scenario gives an explanation for something, one that we would otherwise lack, then we should give that scenario credence. Therefore, we should give this scenario credence, and thus allow that the June 4th flight might well have been carrying radar reflectors.3 (b)So, we seem correct in saying that it’s (not just possible, but) likely that the June 4th flight did, indeed, carry ML-307 radar reflectors for tracking.
Second, we have to establish that the July 4 balloons flight path took it over the Foster ranch: Charles Moore, after jogging his memory by looking at Crary’s diary, came to believe that he remembered tracking the June 4th flight. Moor said,
“We tracked Flight #4 [Moore believes the June 4th flight to be Mogul Flight #4] to the Capitan Peak, Arbela, Bluewater New Mexico area before we lost contact with it, 17 miles from the Foster ranch. I vividly remember we tracked it from the ground and air with the various exotic New Mexico town names being called out. It was the first and last time I or any Mogul flight ever had any association with these N.M. locales.”
We can assume what he’s saying is true. Moore also, using available weather data, reconstructed the flight path of the June 4th flight, and found that this balloon could have been taken over the Foster ranch. (c)Therefore, it’s not just possible, but probable that the flight trajectory of the June 4th balloon took it over the Foster ranch.
Third, we have to show that the debris is reconcilable with the ML-307 radar reflector and other parts of the Mogul train: Jesse Marcel, Jr. described the small beam that he handled in his kitchen when his father brought the Foster-ranch debris home to show his family this way: it was an I-beam, light-weight like balsa wood but seemingly metallic, about the same color as that of the foil-like material—and it had a set of pink/purple “symbols” running down its length—and there was no tape attached to it. He said that it was not wood. But, According to Charles Moore, the balsa wood beams that made up the support structure of the ML-307 radar reflector were coated with Elmers-type glue for strength—this coating could have made them seem more metallic than wooden. Also, Jesse Jr. may have been mistaken about the beam’s shape. His father said that the small members had a rectangular cross-section. Or, the stick that Jesse Jr. handled may simply have had flared edges for some reason. Irving Newton told Jeffrey that he saw markings on the balsa sticks in General Ramey’s office—he claimed that the marks were the result of the dye from (no longer attached) tape having bled through to the stick. Such marks would be consistent with those described by Jesse Jr. And it would explain why they did not appear flower-like. A drawing was made of the symbol-like marks according to Jesse Marcel, Jr’s description while he was under hypnosis. The same artist drew the marks as remembered by Irving Newton. The drawings are similar.
These arguments show that the beam that Marcel Jr. handled may have been simply the strut from an ML-307 radar reflector. (That is, the description of Jesse’s beam is reconcilable with a beam from an ML-307 radar reflector.)
The Bakelite-like material could represent the remains of the plastic cases that carried kerosene4 or sand for ballast, or of the covering of an instrument package. Therefore, the Bakelite-like material is reconcilable with part of a Mogul balloon train.
The foil matches the foil of a reflector, and the parchment matches the foil’s paper backing. Therefore, the foil and parchment is reconcilable with such a reflector.
The string-like material described by Bill Brazel matches the nylon twine of the Mogul train. Therefore, the string-like material is reconcilable with the Mogul train.
The photos of the debris in Ramey’s office show clearly the remains of an ML-307 radar reflector and Mac Brazel himself, in the July 9, 1947 Roswell Daily Record, is quoted as saying that the debris was made up of sticks, foil, and tape with flower patterns on it.
“Indestructible” can mean merely “tough”: If the material was actually so indestructible, it would not break up into pieces. But it broke up. So, it was not actually so indestructible.
The sledgehammer story was second hand: Marcel indicated that one of the airmen tried to, but couldn’t, dent the foil[?], and told Marcel about it.
Cavitt now says he immediately recognized the debris as the remains of a balloon…covering an area 20 feet square.5 Cavitt, relieved of any secrecy restrictions, said, and signed an affidavit stating, that it was a weather balloon and radar reflector.6
(d)These arguments show that the debris was reconcilable with a Mogul balloon train. (e)Therefore the balloon that Crary described as having been launched on June 4, 1947 must have carried radar reflectors and must have landed on the Foster ranch, and was the source of the debris in question.[a,b,c,d,e 3] Therefore, the debris was not exotic, but mundane.
In this argument, the skeptic says (see b) that it’s (not just possible, but) likely that the June 4th flight did, indeed, carry ML-307 radar reflectors for tracking. But there is no real tangible evidence at all that the June 4th flight carried radar reflectors.
In fact, the lack of radar tracking records suggests that none of the launches had radar targets.
Also, the skeptic says (here) that “we can assume what he’s saying is true,” but (f)if it can be shown that what Moore says is not reliable, then we should not accept Moore’s statements at face value. (g)In fact, Charles Moore claimed to be on hand for the launch, on January 4, 1948, of the Skyhook balloon that Kentucky Air National Guard pilot, Captain Thomas Mantell, on January 7, chased before crashing, but records have shown that he did not show up for a Skyhook launch until the end of the month. Moore acknowledged that his memory was wrong.7 He also said that his memories of the specifics of Mogul flights were generally vague. Therefore, (h)We should not accept Moore’s statements at face value. [f,g,h 1]
Also, three months later, Flight #17 flew over these same “exotic” locales. Yet Moore said that only one flight flew over these. Therefore, Moore may well have been thinking of Flight #17, not the June 4th flight.8
The skeptic claims (here) that “Moore, using available weather data, reconstructed the flight path of the June 4th flight, and found that this balloon could have been taken over the Foster ranch.” But Dr. David Rudiak recalculated the flight path and found that the balloon probably did not go over the ranch.
The skeptic claims (here) that his arguments show that “the beam that Marcel Jr. handled may have been simply the strut from an ML-307 radar reflector.” Of course it’s logically possible that it was part of a radar reflector, but his evidence for its being such a strut is weak. The skeptic states (here) that “Irving Newton told Jeffrey that he saw markings on the balsa sticks in General Ramey’s office—he claimed that the marks were the result of the dye from tape having bled through to the stick.” But, in fact, dye would not have adhered to coated sticks.9
And, if the dye had had a composition that would have allowed it to bleed through the tape, it would have just bled off of the tape before soaking into it.10 And, such ink would have simply come off of the coated stick before it would have bled into it.11 And, everyone agrees that the tape used in the radar reflectors was made of cellophane, which is impermeable, so printed designs on the outer surface could not have bled through to the other side and through the adhesive to leave a distinct mark on the wood.12
Also, (i)if Newton’s testimony has changed over time, then his present story cannot be trusted. (j)Newton had been interviewed by William Moore for the book The Roswell Incident (1979), and ten years later by Kevin Randle. In neither interview did Newton mention having seen the floral tape. Also Newton said he met Marcel—but his story changed. This bolsters the view that Newton’s more recent account in general lacks credibility. Also, in correspondence with Robert Todd and C. B. Moore, Newton claimed to have met Major Marcel in General Ramey’s office and that Marcel had insisted that the balloon and radar targets on the floor were parts of an alien spacecraft and that the markings on the stick were alien hieroglyphics—but when interviewed by William Moore for his 1979 book, Newton said, referring to Maj. Marcel: “I was later told that a major from Roswell had identified the stuff.” (k)Therefore, Newton’s present story cannot be trusted… is suspect. [i,j,k 1]
And there are compelling reasons to believe that the beam was, in fact, not a balsa wood strut from a radar reflector. Recall that William Brazel, Mac’s son, said of this “balsa”: “…some wooden like particles…like balsa wood in weight, but a bit darker in color and much harder… It was pliable but wouldn’t break…weighed nothing, but you couldn’t scratch it with your fingernail.”13 And he’s quoted as saying, “wood, I call it wood, I don’t know what it was; it was something like balsa wood, but it wouldn’t burn, and I couldn’t cut it with my knife.”14
And, if Mac Brazel had bothered to take a piece of balsa wood to show the Proctors (and then take a lot of pieces of material to Roswell), he would’ve been a complete dope—and no one, including, e.g., the Proctors, claim that he was a dope; rather, everyone thought that the debris was truly weird.
Dr. Jesse Marcel (Jesse Marcel Jr.)., who had been a hobbyist as a boy—he had built model airplanes from balsa wood, and so was very familiar with balsa wood—was adamant that the “balsa” stick was in fact not balsa wood.
Loretta Proctor, Mac Brazel’s neighbor said of this material, “We cut on it with a knife and would hold a match on it, and it wouldn’t burn. We knew it wasn’t wood…I hadn’t seen anything like it.”15
The skeptic claims (here) that the Bakelite-like material could represent the remains of the plastic cases that carried kerosene [Durant citing C. Moore] or sand for ballast, or of the covering of an instrument package. But Dr. Marcel (one of those who described the “plastic”), who had worked with bakelite, did not identify the material as bakelite.16 Also, the pieces of “bakelite” that Marcel Jr. saw in his kitchen were flat and colored opaque black, but the plexiglass containers of kerosene ballast allegedly carried by the June 4th Mogul flight would have been egg-shaped, with no flat surfaces, and would have been transparent, not opaque black. Therefore, the “bakelite” from the debris could not have been from the Mogul ballast containers.17
Nor could the “bakelite” have been plastic from an instrument package, because, first, the instrument package was in the upper part of the Mogul array, and the skeptic’s view is that the debris was from the lower section.18 Second, the instrument package was composed of a sonobuoy microphone and a transmitter. The transmitter was housed in a box, most likely made of sheet metal, not plastic, with the dimensions of only three 3” x 5” x 5”.19 Third, if the “bakelite” that Dr. Marcel described had been from a bakelite instrument cabinet, then it would have had some straight sides and signs of workmanship (such as drilled holes). But the sides of the “bakelite” Marcel saw were jagged, and there was no sign of workmanship. Recall that Msgt. Lewis Rickett said, apparently referring to the “bakelite,” that although the piece was extremely thin, it couldn’t be bent or broken, and that he couldn’t figure out what it was.
The skeptic states (here) that “the foil matches the foil of a reflector, and the parchment matches the foil’s paper backing.” But according to Dr. Marcel (under hypnosis), there was no paper attached to either side of the foil-like material, or attached to the “foil” in any way. Therefore, in this respect, there is no match between the debris and what Dr. Marcel examined in his kitchen. Also according to Dr. Marcel, no tape was attached to the foil. Therefore, again, there is no match. And, if the foil of a reflector had been torn apart into many small pieces by winds on the rough terrain of the Foster ranch, and then stuffed into a cardboard box and then dumped on the Marcel’s kitchen floor, then it all would have been crumpled, would have creases, scratches and abrasions. But according to Dr. Marcel, each piece of foil that he examined was flat, and the materials exhibited no creases, scratches or abrasions. Recall also how Frankie Rowe described it (she was apparently referring to the foil) as smooth as glass. Phyllis McGuire also said it was smooth. Dr. John Kromschroeder, friend of Pappy Henderson (here), described the metal he saw as being different than alloys we have in our aircraft. Also, recall (here) how Phyllis McGuire, Frankie Rowe, Bill Brazel and others described how this material would uncrumple and flatten out on its own. Bill Brazel said that he couldn’t tear it. Major Marcel described (an inflexible version of?) the foil as being thin as tinfoil but could not be bent or dented. (He apparently meant that the foil would not remain creased.) Therefore, it is simply false to say that the “foil” of the debris matched the foil of a reflector.
The skeptic says (here) that the photos of the debris in Ramey’s office show clearly the remains of an ML-307 radar reflector. But as Kevin D. Randle and Donald Schmitt, in UFO Crash at Roswell20 say:
“Marcel said that he had brought the debris to Ramey’s office, where the general examined it and then decided that he wanted to see exactly where the object crashed. Marcel and Ramey left for the map room and while they were gone, someone carried the wreckage out, replacing it with the weather balloon long before any reporters were allowed into the office.”
The authors cite Walter G. Haut (personal interview, 1 April, 1989) as the source of this information. Haut was the public information officer at the Roswell Army Air Base who issued the news release mentioning the recovery of a flying disc. In fact, the foil in the photos is unlike the debris foil as described, the latter being smooth and in small pieces. Therefore, it must be the case that the original wreckage was replaced with the remains of an ordinary radar target. Therefore the debris had been switched.
The skeptic concludes (at e) that “the balloon that Crary described as having been launched on June 4, 1947 must have carried radar reflectors and must have landed on the Foster ranch, and was the source of the debris in question.” But if Marcel Sr. had tried to piece together an ordinary radar target together on his kitchen floor, then he would have been a nut. He wasn’t a nut. Therefore, the debris was not ordinary. Therefore, the debris couldn’t have been simply the remains of a radar target.
The skeptic says (here) that “Mac Brazel himself, in the July 9, 1947 Roswell Daily Record, is quoted as saying that the debris was made up of sticks, foil, and tape with flower patterns on it.” But it’s important to recall that Mac Brazel made this claim after he had been in military custody—it is reasonable to assume he had been pressured to tell the cover story given him by the Army.
The skeptic says (here) that “Cavitt now says he immediately recognized the debris as the remains of a balloon blanketing an area 20 feet square.” But the Roswell Daily Record says the stuff covered an area 200 yards in diameter. “Capt. McAndrews says it was a huge Mogul train of balloons over 500 feet long with 23 balloons and sonobuoys and radar reflectors.” (Friedman) Something like that could not fit into an area only 20 feet square.21
And, the skeptic says (see d) that his arguments show that “the debris was reconcilable with a Mogul balloon train.” But if Maj. Marcel had taken a mere radar target home, and tried to piece it together on his kitchen floor, he would’ve been a nut. But he wasn’t a nut. In fact, he was promoted from major to lieutenant colonel not long after the Roswell crashed disk events. “Then he was assigned to a vital program that collected data in a search for evidence that the Soviet Union had exploded its first nuclear weapon.”22 Marcel told his interviewers that he had written the very report that President Truman read on the air declaring Russia had exploded an atomic device. If Mac Brazel had taken pieces of a radar target to neighbors, and wanted them to come look at it, or took such pieces to Roswell to show the authorities, he would’ve been a dope, and no one alleges that he was a dope.
The skeptic might present a rebuttal:
Skeptic. You argue (here) that “in fact, the lack of radar tracking records suggests that none of the launches had radar targets.” But C. Moore, the on-scene Project Engineer of Mogul, thought that the June 4th flight may have had radar targets. Moore would’ve known if they all lacked targets. All that I have to do is demonstrate that it’s possible that the June 4th flight carried radar targets.
And you note that “Major Marcel described the ‘foil’ as being thin as tinfoil but could not be bent or dented.” But we can’t trust Marcel’s testimony. After all, in correspondence with Robert Todd and C. E. Moore, Newton claimed to have met Major Marcel in General Ramey’s office, and that Marcel had insisted that the balloon and radar targets on the floor were parts of an alien spacecraft and that the markings on the sticks were alien hieroglyphics. [Durant relates this claim by Newton]
You say (here) that “the debris had been switched.” But General Thomas DuBose, then colonel and General Ramey’s chief of staff took the material from the plane to Ramey’s office, and was one of those posing in the photos with the debris. Jaime Shandera interviewed DuBose and DuBose was adamant that there was no switch.
Also, in an interview in William Moore’s book The Roswell Incident, Jesse Marcel Sr. said that the photos that he was in were of the actual debris, and in the later photos, that he was not in, the material was not the actual debris. But the photos with Marcel Sr. clearly show remains of an ML-307 radar reflector.
The skeptic points out (here) that “Newton claimed to have met Major Marcel in General Ramey’s office, and that Marcel had insisted that the balloon and radar targets on the floor were parts of an alien spacecraft and that the markings on the sticks were alien hieroglyphics.” But If we were to credit Newton’s story, then we’d have to say that Major Marcel was delusional.23 But as I noted above, he wasn’t delusional. As I said, he was promoted from major to lieutenant colonel not long after the Roswell crashed disk events, and “then he was assigned to a vital program that collected data in a search for evidence that the Soviet Union had exploded its first nuclear weapon.”24 Marcel told his interviewers, “I wrote the very report that President Truman read on the air declaring Russia had exploded an atomic device.”
And the skeptic says (here) that “General Thomas DuBose…was adamant that there was no switch.” But DuBose had said it was a cover story.25
There was a cover-up that was so intense that it cannot be explained by the theory that it was a mere balloon.
On July 8, Mac Brazel was taken by the military from the home of Walt Whitmore, Sr., along with the wire recording of an interview, conducted ? by Jud Roberts, of Brazel. Brazel was detained by the military for four or five days to a week, during which time he was not allowed to use a phone, had to endure an Army physical, was questioned, the same questions being asked over and over, and was subjected to intimidation. Also during this period, Brazel’s neighbors, Floyd Proctor and Lyman Strickland or L. D. Sparks, saw Brazel in Roswell being escorted by military men. Mac walked right past them as if he didn’t know them. Leonard “Pete” Porter, L.D. Sparks and Bill Jenkins also saw Brazel with the military escort. Brazel was escorted to The Roswell Daily Record, The Morning Dispatch, and Roswell radio stations KGFL and KSWS, where he gave interviews, now telling a new story. He no longer claimed that there was anything unusual about the debris, but now claimed that the object was just a weather balloon. He now said that he discovered the object on June 14.26
On July 9, 1947, the military conducted searches of news offices of media in Roswell, Albuquerque, and Santa Fe in order to get copies of the original press release and other documents relating to the event.27
On July 8, the minority owner of KGFL, Jud Roberts, got a call from the executive secretary of the FCC, T. J. Slowie, who threatened KGFL with the loss of its license should they broadcast any part of Brazel’s interview.28
A few minutes after the call from the FCC was made to KGFL, U.S. Senator Dennis Chavez called KGFL and strongly advised that KGFL do what the FCC told them to do.29
Recall that Lydia Sleppy’s teletype transmission to the AP of John McBoyle’s news story about the crashed disk and the bodies was interrupted by the FBI. Later, when Sleppy brought the subject up to McBoyle, he told her to forget about it. He said that she wasn’t supposed to know about it. McBoyle died in 1991 without having talked to either his family or UFO researchers about the incident.30
While Mac was in military custody, Paul Brazel, one of Mac’s sons, arrived to take care of the ranch. He told his nephew, Joe Brazel, that the military threw him off the ranch—he was not able to water the horses.31
Mac’s other son, Bill, over time after the incident collected scraps of the debris that the military clean-up crews had missed. He put these pieces into a cigar box. During a visit to Wade’s Bar in Corona, he mentioned that he had some scraps of the debris. The next day, an officer named Captain Armstrong and Three NCOs visited him and confiscated his collection.32
Bill took the men out to the pasture, and while he was gone, six soldiers came in and “trashed” the house, even pulling up the floorboards. In the cattle shed they slit open the feedbags, spilling the feed on the ground. Fawn Fritz, Bill’s daughter, told researchers that they went so far as to empty a water holding tank.33
Bob Wolf, who was minority owner of KGFL, talked to Mac Brazel at a festival in Corona. Wolf brought up the 1947 incident. Mac said, “Those people will kill you if I tell you what I know!” and walked away.34
Recall how George Houck, whom Earl Fulford claims drove the truck carrying the space ship onto the base, refused, so many years after the incident, to talk to Fulford about it.35
Frank Joyce, the KGFL broadcaster who had talked on the phone to Mac Brazel when Brazel was in Sheriff Wilcox’s office on July 6, was telephoned by “a military person in Washington” who told Joyce to be quiet about the incident. Joyce told him where to go. The caller said, “I’ll show you what I can do!” and hung up the phone. One or two days after he received the call, Joyce was told by Walt Whitmore, his boss, to get into Walt’s car. Joyce got in the car, and noticed that a strange man dressed in a strange uniform was in the back seat.
Whitmore drove north for over an hour, and pulled up to a shack. Whitmore told Joyce to go into the shack. Joyce went in alone. Shortly thereafter, Mac Brazel came in and said, “You’re not going to say anything about what I told you the other day, are you?” Joyce replied that if Brazel did not want him to, then he would not. Brazel left, commenting that their lives would never be the same. When Joyce went back to the car, he saw that the strange man was gone. Soon after that, Joyce was taken to a Texas hospital, where he stayed for a year or so—an episode in his life that he doesn’t fully understand.36
Frankie Dwyer Rowe, at the time of the incident, was shown a metallic piece of the wreckage by a highway patrol officer. After being wadded up in the hand and dropped, the piece would regain its shape. It also couldn’t be cut or burned.
One or two days later, a man in an MP uniform came to the house wanting to talk to Frankie. The man questioned Frankie about what she had seen. He smacked his palm with his billy club and told her she and her whole family would be killed if she said anything to anyone about the incident. He said, “There’s a big desert out there. No one will ever find you.”37
Investigators Carey and Schmitt report that the widows of many witnesses shouted “He never said anything,” before slamming down the phone or slamming the door.38
Dee Proctor, who as a 7-year-old, was with Mac Brazel when they discovered the debris field in 1947 refused to talk with UFO researchers about the incident. He died in 2006.39
Roswell deputy sheriff Tommy Thompson, who would be expected to have been fully aware of the events in question, told researchers that he has no memory of it at all.39a
Trinidad “Trini” Chavez was the young son of a hired hand working on the Richards ranch, which bordered the Foster ranch. Trini watched the clean-up from a distance with friends. He told researchers that he saw soldiers lined up, retrieving the debris. He described how trucks and jeeps ringed the site.40
Associated Press photographer, Robin Adair, was sent to Roswell from El Paso, Texas. He said he could not get pictures because the area was ringed by policemen and FBI personnel. He said that the authorities wouldn’t let them get within three-quarters of a mile of the site. Adair flew over the site but was waved off. He said that there were many troops and vehicles on the scene.41
In 1947, Sgt. Robert E. Smith was assigned to the First Air Transport Unit. He told UFO researchers that a number of groups, each comprising 60 or more men, were taken to the Foster ranch for the clean-up. They were told to “pick up everything not nailed down.” He described how one group would cover the site, then another group would go over the same area.42
According to Earl Fulford, who had seen the truck carrying the tarp-covered object and spoken to its driver, his friend George Houck [see above], he, along with 15 to 20 other men were bused to a remote site (the Brazel debris field). He said that armed MPs surrounded the area. Fulford and the others were each given a burlap bag and told to put whatever they found into the bags. He said that they walked side by side in a single line, picking up the debris. They went back and forth over the field until 4 p.m.43
First Lt. Walter Haut, the Public Information Officer for the 509th Bomb Group at the Roswell AAF, the man who had sent out the news release about the recovered disk, stated in the affidavit that, in accord with his wishes, was released after his death [see above], that teams would periodically go out to the sites in order to search for any remaining material.44
Recall that Maj. Patrick H. Saunders, who was the Roswell AAF base adjutant in 1947, shortly before he died bought a number of copies of the paperback edition of The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell by Kevin Randle and Don Schmitt. On the flyleaf of this book, Randle and Schmitt describe how the cover-up and cleanings were accomplished. It explains how records were altered and serial numbers were changed. It describes how the cleanup was done by MPs brought in from different locations so that the individuals involved would be less likely to know each other and talk about it together. Saunders wrote the following note above this text in each copy and mailed the books to close friends and family: “Here’s the truth and I still haven’t told anybody anything!”45
(l)If the crashed object had been a Mogul balloon and array, constructed of familiar and unclassified materials, any cover-up would have been far less intensive than the cover-up that, as shown by the above material, actually occurred.
(m)But the cover-up was intensive to the degree indicated by this material.
(n)So the crashed object could not have been a Mogul balloon and array.[l,m,n 4]
Notes
1. source: Log Summary of the NYU Group as given in Wikipedia—AF Report on Roswell
2. Moore’s book: UFO Crash at Roswell: the Genesis of a Modern Myth, with Saler & Ziegler
3. adapted from an argument by Charles Moore
4. Durant citing C. Moore D1, p.10
5. Stanton T. Friedman, “Kent Jeffrey and Roswell,” 1997
6. R. J. Durant, “The Roswell Debris Testimony (Part Three),” MUFON UFO Journal, March 1998, p.8
7. a point made by Brad Sparks
8. argument based on one by David Rudiak
9. D2 p.18
10. ibid.
11. ibid.
12. ibid.
13. F&B, p.73
14. D3 p.7
15. F&B, p.72
16. D2 p.17
17. ibid.
18. ibid.
19. ibid.
20. Avon Books 1991 pp.75-6
21. from an argument by Stanton Friedman in “Kent Jeffrey and Roswell,” July 21, 1997
22. F&B p.17
23. D3, p.6
24. F&B p.17
25. R&S pp.74-5
26. C&S pp.39-40, 59, 61, 64-5, 69; R&S pp.41-3; B&M pp.83-4
27. C&S, p.40
28. Jud Roberts. C&S p.59
29. Frank Joyce. D&S p.60
30. C&S pp.60-1, 181
31. Joe Brazel. C&S pp.70-1
32. Bill Brazel. C&S p.74
33. Fawn Fritz. C&S p.74
34. Bob Wolf. C&S, p.76
35. C&S p.104
36. C&S pp.169-170
37. Frankie Dwyer Rowe. C&S pp.170-1 and television interviews
38. C&S p.181
39. C&S pp.46, 127, 181-2
39a. C&S p.182
40. C&S p.51
41. Robin Adair. C&S p.63
42. Robert E. Smith. C&S p.105
43. Earl Fulford. C&S p. 105-6
44. Walter Haut. C&S p.217
45. C&S pp.198, 225-6
SKEPTICAL REPLY 8—THE “IT WAS A MOGUL BALLOON” ARGUMENT, PART II: THE “AMAZING COINCIDENCE” ARGUMENT
The following argument is, in my opinion, the strongest argument against the notion that the Roswell debris was exotic or alien. But I believe that there is a good rebuttal to it, and that in the process of rebutting it, we learn something about the visitors’ intentions. The skeptic might say, at this point:
Skeptic. You claim (here) that “an alien spacecraft crashed and left the debris on the Foster Ranch.”The following is an argument against that claim: Dr. Albert Crary, in his log for June 4, 1947 (see Reply 7, at top), describes the launch of a “regular sonobuoy” in a cluster of balloons. This cluster was, according to available records, never recovered. Believer, none of the arguments that you articulate above clearly show that the cluster of June 4 did not carry ML-307 radar reflectors. In fact, there are good reasons for thinking both that it did and that it did not. If it did carry such reflectors, however, then there is every reason to believe that they had tape with purple floral designs attached to them. Furthermore, there are good reasons (see above, to think that this flight was heading toward the Foster ranch when it disappeared and good reasons to think that it wasn’t. There is now no way to reconstruct its flight path, using meteorological data or from memory, with any degree of certainty. Therefore, it remains a distinct possibility that on June 4, 1947, a flight carrying ML-307 radar reflectors was released and was heading toward the Foster ranch when it disappeared.
Now consider the following: If the train of such a balloon cluster had landed on the Foster ranch, and been shredded by the surface winds, then its remains would consist of short balsa-wood beams, quite possibly with tape—with purple floral designs on it—attached to the beams, metal foil, paper (backing on the foil), nylon twine, and possibly a box for ballast or plastic parts of such a box. But this matches exactly the gross properties of the Foster ranch debris. The actual Roswell debris (let's ignore for now the debris that was photographed in Ramey's office, since not everyone believes that that was the actual material), as everyone agrees, consisted of light balsa-like beams with purple designs on them, metal foil, a paper- or parchment-like material, tough string, a small box, and a bakelite-type material. (a)If the Roswell debris was from a crashed alien spacecraft, then this amazing Mogul match was coincidental. (b)But the chances are infinitesimally tiny that a crashed exotic craft would just happen to leave wreckage that so closely and coincidentally matched, even in gross appearance, what may well have been the parts of a balloon train attached to a balloon that may well have disappeared in the same area at roughly the same time. It’s ridiculous to believe that such a fantastically incredible coincidence occurred. (c)So, no alien craft crashed near Roswell in 1947. [a,b,c 4]
You say (here) that “the materials that were recovered near Roswell in July of 1947, the bodies, and the ship itself were exotic, otherworldly.” But as you agree (here), (d)if the material was exotic, then a saucer crashed. And so, (e)the materials were not exotic.[d,c,e 4]1
In fact, I agree with the skeptic (see b) that “it’s ridiculous to believe that such a fantastically incredible coincidence occurred,” and that, therefore (see c), “no alien craft crashed near Roswell in 1947.” But he (see d) repeats the claim that if the material was exotic, then a saucer crashed. But, again, this is not proven (nor is d, which I adopted only provisionally [here]). For instance, (as I noted above, in relation to the “flying saucers wouldn’t crash” argument) if the debris was left by aliens to simulate a crash, i.e., if they staged the “crash,” then the debris could be exotic without there having been a crash (i.e., d and the conditional statement, a, would be false). The skeptic, however, might respond:
Skeptic. As I noted (here) in response to your earlier argument, it's certainly within the realm of possibility that it was staged by aliens. But when I said (at e) that the materials weren't exotic, I meant, of course, that the chance of their being exotic was miniscule, and not worth considering. But, as before, you seem to be suggesting not merely that the idea that it was staged is possible, but that it is actually plausible. But that’s ridiculous. Ockham’s Razor simply rules it out. You have no reason to attribute the Roswell incident to aliens.
Actually, if that was all there was to my argument, then the idea of "alien staging" would, indeed, be ruled out by Ockham’s Razor. But don’t forget that Ockham’s Razor states that the more complex explanation (the explanation that requires more novelties to be posited) is not to be chosen without necessity. But the fact that there is evidence for the materials’ other-worldliness, that the reports by solid witnesses exist, makes it necessary to choose the more complex explanation, namely, the explanation that says that the “crash” was staged.
In other words, you proved that there couldn’t have been a crash, yet the witness reports prove that the debris was other-worldly. The only conclusion we can make is that the “crash” was staged by otherworldly beings.
Skeptic. To make plausible your notion that the "crash" was staged, you have to show why the other-worldly beings might want to stage such an incident.
I don’t really have to show why they might have done it, because the conclusion that it was staged seems inescapable. But we might speculate on the motivation of the other-worldly entities. We might do this by looking at the result of the staging, assuming that the goal of the other-worldly beings and the actual result are the same. What, then, was the result of the alleged crash at Roswell? The result was a government cover-up of the entire other-worldly visitation phenomenon. We can possibly discern the entities’ plan, then: “We wish to reveal our presence to the people of earth in our own way. To prevent the government of this land from disclosing our presence in some other way, we will bestow upon them an artifact that they will take to be a crashed ship, something that they would so zealously guard, that they would institute a program to cover up the entire phenomenon.” Yet the debris clearly did resemble parts of the missing Mogul balloon train. It can only be that the “crash” was designed to have three different effects: first, the debris forestalled any government disclosure; second, the Mogul match allowed the scientific and academic ranks to ignore the phenomenon; third, the incident spoke to the those who could identify and solve the dilemma, showing these critical thinkers more about the other-worldly beings than even those in the government were aware of. The next question, then, is, among the non-governmental people, why are the critical thinkers singled out to receive this knowledge? I'll leave this as an open question.
Notes
1. from an argument by Kent Jeffrey: J pp.10-11
SKEPTICAL REPLY 9—THE “IT'S NOT SCIENTIFIC” ARGUMENT
Here’s another argument of a kind that’s often made against those who believe that flying saucers are real. It's really a general argument, but since it might well be used in an argument about Roswell, I'll include it here.
Skeptic. You claim (here), “if it is true that a large number of witnesses confirmed the exotic nature of the crashed object, the properties of the debris, the bodies, and the ship itself, and the witnesses included a large proportion of the responsible, respectable, level-headed people who would be expected to have been most centrally involved, then the object was in fact exotic, otherworldly.”
But your claim here is just not proven at all. In fact, it seems completely possible that all these respectable witnesses could have claimed that the material was exotic when in fact it was not. In other words, just because these witnesses claimed to have seen exotic materials and creatures, we are not, on that basis, justified in the least to believe that the crash was exotic.
In general, countless examples of eyewitness error, and what we know about the psychology of misremembering, and of the confabulation of different memories, show us that eyewitness testimony is utterly unreliable.
This is why eyewitness testimony, mere anecdotes, cannot reasonably be taken to justify even the smallest degree of belief in anything, and so does not constitute evidence at all. (And this is why, despite the fact that we have plenty of eyewitness testimony about flying saucers, we have no evidence of visitation by exotic beings or aliens.) In the Roswell case, the fact that 40 years after the event, people start “remembering” things is not in the slightest compelling. Lt. Haut, for example, said that he saw exotic materials, a craft and bodies. He saw something, but could all too easily have misinterpreted what he saw.
So, eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable and is worthless as evidence.
(a)If something can be dissected, photographed, discussed, looked at, etc., then it can be used as evidence to justify our beliefs in things.
(b)Physical evidence can be dissected, photographed, discussed, looked at, etc.
(c)So, Physical evidence can be used as evidence to justify our belief in things.[a,b,c 9+1]
(d)On the other hand, if something cannot be dissected, photographed, discussed, looked at, etc., then it cannot be used as evidence to justify our belief in anything.
(e)Eyewitness testimony cannot be dissected, photographed, discussed, looked at, etc.
(f)So, eyewitness testimony cannot be used as evidence to justify our belief in anything.[d,e,f 9+1]
In the Roswell case, you can’t produce any physical evidence. (You say the government has it. But we don't have it.)
So, there’s simply no reason to believe something exotic was retrieved near Roswell in 1947.
(g)Furthermore, if a belief is not arrived at through a scientific approach, then it is not a justified belief.
(h)If a belief is not supported by physical evidence, but only by mere anecdote, by eyewitness testimony, then it is not scientific. For instance, “if you're a biologist and you want to name a new species, you have to actually have a type specimen, an actual body….Once we have that, then we have what scientists consider to be empirical data, where we can dissect it …, look at it and so forth.”1
(i)Your belief is based on mere anecdote. “Where is the spacecraft? You say they hid it. Where is the documentation?”2
(j)Therefore, your belief was not arrived at through a scientific approach. Your belief is not scientific.[h,i,j 1]
(k)Therefore, your belief is not justified.[g,j,k 1]
I refer anyone who finds the above argument convincing to “The ‘Eyewitness Testimony is not Evidential’ Argument” in the Philosophical Dialectic. I believe that Archae there shows that eyewitness testimony can indeed often justify our belief in things. He claims that the following are the criteria that we can use to determine whether or not to treat any particular eyewitness testimony as good evidence:
Criterion 1. Is the character of the witness good?
Criterion 2. Is what’s reported susceptible to multiple interpretations?
Criterion 3. Are there multiple witnesses?
Regarding my claim (here) that if it is true that a large number of witnesses confirmed the exotic nature of the crash, and if the witnesses included respectable people, then the object was otherworldly: this claim stands, because this eyewitness testimony is, by these criteria, evidential:
Re Criterion 1: The character of the witnesses here, in general, is superb. Many were hand-picked members of an elite group, the only atomic bomb group in the world. These included, as I pointed out above, Maj. Marcel, the base security officer at Roswell Army Air Field; Lt. Haut, the base public information officer who was a trusted aid and friend of the base commander, Col. Blanchard;3 Gen. Exon, who was to become, in 1964, base commander of Wright-Patterson AFB, where the materials and bodies were said to have been shipped in 1947; Counter Intelligence Corps noncommissioned officer, Bill Rickett, who worked for Capt. Cavitt; Maj. Saunders, who was the RAAF base adjutant.
Re Criterion 2: The things observed by these witnesses are not susceptible to multiple interpretations. When a witness says, for instance, that she saw a small, silvery sheet that, if wadded up in the hand and dropped onto the surface of a table, would spread out like mercury into a thin irregular sheet in one or two seconds—a piece of metal foil that could not be cut with scissors, scratched or burned and could not be permanently creased, it cannot be that she misperceived what she saw, and that the material she saw was something prosaic. When Gen. Exon, for example, said that “Everyone from the White House down knew that what we had found was not of this world within 24 hours of our finding it,” we cannot imagine what prosaic fact he could have misinterpreted in order to form the belief that everyone knew that the material was not of this world—we are entitled to believe him.
Re Criterion 3. In this case, multiple witnesses attest to the same extraordinary things.
Therefore, the eyewitness testimony in this case is highly evidential, and my conclusions stand.
Notes
1. Michael Shermer, Larry King Live
2. ibid.
3. C&S p.212
SKEPTICAL REPLY 10—THE “THEY WOULDN’T KEEP IT SECRET” ARGUMENT
Here’s another argument against the idea that the Roswell debris was exotic:
Skeptic. The following argument shows that there must be something wrong with the logic leading up to your conclusion that “The materials that were recovered at Roswell in July of 1947, the bodies, and the ship itself were exotic, otherworldly”:
(a)If the crash was other-worldly, then the government covered it up. (b)If they covered it up, they must have had a reason to do so. (c)But there’s no conceivable reason why they would’ve covered it up, or would still be covering it up—to the contrary, since it would have been the greatest discovery in the history of science, NASA would be elated—they’d go to congress and get more funding. (d)So, the government didn’t cover up any crash of an exotic, otherworldly craft.[b,c,d 4] And therefore, (e)there was no such crash.[a,d,e 4]1
In fact, people have suggested possible reasons for the cover-up. Here’s a list of possible reasons:
A. The government would want to figure out how the saucers work so that they might duplicate them. But since they don't want enemy nations duplicating them, they keep what they learn secret.
B. The government would want to figure out how the saucers work so that they might protect the U.S. against enemy nations that are duplicating the alien technology—again, the U.S. would want to keep what it learns secret, so as not to assist enemy efforts.
C. If the government made an announcement, if there was disclosure, some people might “lose it,” they would be psychologically damaged by the knowledge. Or, there could be panic.
D. The stock market, reacting to the public mood of uncertainty that would result from disclosure, would plunge.
E. Americans would begin to see themselves as citizens of the Earth, rather than as Americans. But the American government wants to foster nationalism.
F. Some religious fundamentalists have proclaimed that humans are the universe’s only sentient race, and that flying saucers can only be the work of the devil. Their ministries, it is said, would suffer from disclosure—many of these leaders are politically powerful, and might influence the government’s decision to cover up the facts.
G. Any government announcement would entail an admission that the government has been lying for decades—they would not want to admit that.
H. Disclosure might lead to alien technologies inspiring new methods in the areas of transportation, energy, communication, etc.—new developments that could give rise to overly rapid economic changes and thus economic chaos.
I. If the U.S. military had over the years made efforts to shoot those craft down, but had lost aircraft and pilots in the attempts, the government might not want the public to know how useless our weapons are against alien technology.
I find most interesting the following possibility:
J. It seems clear that if the aliens are here, then they want to do their work in secret (or, perhaps more accurately, they want to have control over who knows about them). It seems reasonable to suppose, then, that the aliens themselves have coerced the government, in one way or another, to impose a coverup.2
To follow the discussion on this topic, go to “The ‘They Wouldn’t Keep It Secret’ Argument” in the General UFO Section.
Notes
1. from an argument advanced by Michael Shermer
2. Much of this list is taken from Stanton Friedman’s “The UFO Why Questions. I have added Reason J to the list.”
SKEPTICAL REPLY 11—THE “THEY COULDN’T KEEP IT SECRET” ARGUMENT
The skeptic might present the following argument against the view that the Roswell debris was exotic or alien:
Skeptic. Something must be wrong with your logic leading up to your conclusion (here) that “The materials that were recovered at Roswell in July of 1947, the bodies, and the ship itself were exotic, otherworldly,” because if the crash was other-worldly, the government could not have covered it up. Even if they'd tried to cover it up, it would have leaked out and we would have heard about it.1
But we have heard about it, and it was leaked, by many of those who were most intimately involved.2
Notes
1. An argument advanced by Michael Shermer: Coast to Coast radio show, Aug. 1, 2007
2. from a rebuttal by Stanton Friedman: Coast to Coast radio show, Aug. 1, 2007