UFO Conjecture(s)

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

The Roswell Balloons

What was the Roswell debris? Mogul balloons?

No. They were controlled-altitude meteorological balloons.

And who was involved in experiments with those balloons in Roswell, 1947?

David Rudiak’s nemesis, C.B. Moore of Mogul notoriety.

Click here to read an abstract [PDF] of the balloon tests

65 Comments:

  • Greetings,

    I'm not agreed with this article.

    Firstly, the attached document is present in the Roswell full report (appendice n°14 of the Mc Andrew synopsis).

    Secondly, The two flights exposed in the document in pdf are in fact exactly Mogul flight #11, 7 july (p13, appendice n°11 concerning NYU constant level balloons, sect1, general) and Mogul flight #17, 9 september (p.17 of the same document).

    In fact, in this Meteo Bulletin, the searchers cant present the real goal of such balloons (to record acoustical dataes providing from explosions, to "spy" the soviet possible atomic tests and missiles tests). But they are Mogul Balloons the two^^.

    So, the sentence "What was the Roswell debris? Mogul balloons?
    No. They were controlled-altitude meteorological balloons." is relativaly not correct, because the article is concerning Mogul balloons, in fact;)

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.

    Gilles F.fact.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Wednesday, December 15, 2010  

  • I am afraid this article, technically interesting though it may be, is not going to help resolve the Roswell affair. It will not resolve it because the opposing parties will never agree on what the fateful balloon launch early on the morning of June 4 consisted of, nor whether it would, or could, have reached the Foster ranch. Nor whether the junk photographed in Ramey's office was the real debris or substituted stuff, nor whether so and so told lies or simply forgot, nor whether certain others were stupid fools or dupes, nor whether some witnesses were there at all, nor whether the press were fooled, nor whether the FBI were lied to, nor... and so on.....

    See what I mean?

    By Blogger cda, at Wednesday, December 15, 2010  

  • Erratum :I made a mistake, the pages indicated are in fact concerning appendice 11 (and not 12) of Mc Andrew synopsis (NYU Constant-level balloons, section 3, summary of flights

    Part 2:

    Another problem is that flight 5 (5 june) was recovered near Roswell, and we have the drawing. It didn't embark radar-targets (same appendice, p.6). No radar-targets in flight 7 (p.8), 2 july, and it descended near Cloudcroft when loosed.

    Flight 10 (5 july) was not recovered, but the drawing have no radar-targets too.

    Flight 11 (7 july) is too late to match Roswell case, and the drawing shows no radar-target embarked (p.12).

    I hate such balloons ^^

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Wednesday, December 15, 2010  

  • Gilles:

    I have always maintained that something happened at Roswell, and balloons were involved -- Mogul and others.

    The abstract, included here, and other papers we found show that meteorological balloons were being used all over the place in the Roswell "crashed disk" time-frame.

    The paper here is not a Mogul paper, per se.

    It's Moore's (and his colleague's) account of what they were doing meteorologically in the Roswell area.

    Mogul was an adjunct, secret procedure that got into the mix when the USAF thought it might quell the ET brouhaha.

    That ploy merely muddied the waters and blokes like Rudiak have been side-tracked ever since.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, December 15, 2010  

  • A Mogul discussion on Iconoclasts? Ok.

    I'm a non-balloonist, which means no matter if all the balloons in the air in early July 1947 had popped over the Foster Ranch and littered square miles of it, none of them would be what an army officer would call a "flying disk", If "flying disk" was a straightforward and honest statement. If it wasn't, then one wonders what sort of event (if any) could have prompted such a statement among all the possible statements that could have been made.

    However, neither the US Army nor the USAF have acknowledged that the RAAF press release was the source of their sense of being harassed by the news media (they did it to themselves) and the source of why there is any "post-1978" story to respond to (in 1995), and the source of why they'd find themselves whiling away the time with writing the Mogul and crash test dummy stories.

    It would have been lots easier to just tell the story of how and why the press release was made, even if what they would say would all be lies.

    It apparently has never occured to them.

    Unlike most people during the 47 Wave, the army had a definition of "flying disk". You can read this consensus opinion in the Twining Letter the following September, or note it informing General Ramey's comments from Ft Worth during the Roswell incident.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Wednesday, December 15, 2010  

  • Don:

    Nope, no Mogul discussion here, at least not from me.

    My point, with the paper, linked here, is that lots of balloon tests were going on in N.M. and environs.

    (We have dozens of papers showing that all kinds of balloons were being tested for various reasons.)

    One would hope that the discussions elsehwere, about Mogul, might be tempered by the raft of (other) balloon types which could account for some of the debris that was accumulated during the Roswell farce.

    You are right to zero in on the "flying disk" aspect of the Haut release, and the military's definition of same.

    I discounted the Roswell saucer crash scenario but have some reservations now, based upon what Tony Bragalia has dug up -- much of his findings yet to see the light of day on this blog.

    Balloons were intermixed in the Roswell story, by the military, as they were plentiful and at hand.

    They were used to throw off media and the public as to what really happened (or crashed) near Roswell.

    As to what that was remains an enigma, but something happened, something out of the ordinary, and balloons don't seem adequate to provide the answer.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, December 15, 2010  

  • Don raises the question of the "post-1978 story to respond to".
    I wonder about this. Presumably there would have been no newspaper story had there been no Haut press release.

    But Friedman & Moore would still have spoken to Marcel in 1978-79 and learned the story from him. F & M would then have been in the position of knowing the story, knowing the approximate timeframe, and probably knowing some of the witnesses names. But where could they have gone from there? They could never locate the press reports because there were no press reports.

    Friedman would have tried very hard to persuade Marcel & his son over ET, as well as a few others they might have located, but beyond that there seems to be a solid wall leading nowhere.
    They might have located Haut and he MIGHT have had a copy of his 32-year old release, but where would that lead?

    No newspaper report, no dates, nothing. THE ROSWELL INCIDENT could not have been written, and of course none of the subsequent books, articles, films, or in fact anything. It would have been a complete dead end. And there being no official documentation, that would have been the end of it.

    By Blogger cda, at Wednesday, December 15, 2010  

  • Consider the balloon and its kite in the Kellahin Brazel interview:

    "Scattered with the materials over an area about 200 yards across were pieces of gray rubber. All the pieces were small."

    Or the Daily Record:

    "The rubber was smoky gray in color and scattered over an area about 200 yards in diameter."

    Is that normal for neoprene weather balloons and their kites when they come down to dispose themselves clearly over and area of several hundred yards and in small pieces? This shredding would have to occur at a very low altitude for the "debris field" to be so clearly defined, I'd guess. What would cause it to shred like that in the first place?

    The balloon and kite photographed in Ramey's office did not match that description.

    RR wrote: "As to what that was remains an enigma, but something happened, something out of the ordinary, and balloons don't seem adequate to provide the answer."

    Paul McEvoy would have agreed with you I think, based on Friedman's Crash At Corona. I haven't seen a photocopy of the actual article, but this is ST's transcription of the July 9, 1947 editorial in the Daily Record:

    "AND NOW WHAT IS IT?

    With telephones ringing, excited voices shouting into newsroom personnel ears, pouring out eager questions which were unanswerable, it was discovered shortly after publication time of the Record yesterday afternoon that curiosity over the reports
    from 44 states of the union that silver discs had crystallized into
    belief.

    The Record had no more than "hit the streets" until the telephone barrage began, with questioners checking up on what they had just read, doubtful of their own eyes.

    But the story stood, just as all amazing things stand in these days of wonderful feats and curious performances.

    What the disk is is another matter. The Army isn't telling its secrets yet, from all appearances when this was written. Maybe it's a fluke and maybe it isn't. Anyone's guess is pretty good at the moment.

    Maybe the thing is still a hoax, as has been the belief of most folks from the start. But something has been found."

    The day he published the balloon story out of Ft Worth as the headline story, and the day he published the Brazel interview, he has nothing to say about a balloon or its kite.

    "Curious performances", indeed.


    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • Part 1.
    RR said:

    “Nope, no Mogul discussion here, at least not from me.”

    I read this paper some months ago. You do realize, don’t you, that this paper is basically a highly abbreviated version of the same material that was included in the New York University “Constant Level Balloons” reports submitted to the Air Force in 1949? It essentially IS a Mogul discussion, just not identified as such by the use of its then classified code name. There is no material in this paper (published in a professional journal) that does not also appear in those final reports.

    Of most relevance is section 6., “titled Flight results” which says “…The first successful flight stayed at 51,000 ft, plus or minus 100 ft for 38 minutes; another remained between 30,000 and 40,000 ft for 147 minutes.” If you look at the NYU report summary, you will see that these descriptions correspond to Flight #5 (p. 7, Fig. 2) and Flight #7 (p. 9, Fig. 4), which occurred on June 5 and July 2, 1947, respectively. They were recovered at Roswell and Cloudcroft, respectively and therefore obviously did not make it to the Foster Ranch.

    The only relevance of this particular paper to the “Roswell Crash” debate that I can see is that it once again supports the conclusion that the first successful flight of the Constant Altitude control system was on June 5, not June 4, contrary to what Charles Moore would have us believe.

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • Part 2.

    RR continued: …“My point, with the paper, linked here, is that lots of balloon tests were going on in N.M. and environs. (We have dozens of papers showing that all kinds of balloons were being tested for various reasons.)

    One would hope that the discussions elsewhere, about Mogul, might be tempered by the raft of (other) balloon types which could account for some of the debris that was accumulated during the Roswell farce.”

    Yes, lots of balloon tests were taking place over many years, but the only balloon flights that could be of any significance whatsoever to the “Roswell farce” would have to have: 1) taken place in the few weeks or so before the Fourth of July weekend, 2) would have to have been of a character that would have matched the descriptions of material reported in the various news releases, and 3) would have to have been capable of making it to the Foster Ranch from wherever they launched. Any balloon tests that didn’t fit all those 3 criteria could not have played a role in the story because they would not have matched either the time, location, or descriptive aspects of the story. The critical factor is not how many balloon papers were published in that time, but how many balloon flights took place that could match those criteria. How many do you suppose that could be?

    So far, we have been able to identify one and only one candidate, the Mogul Project flight that took place on June 4. All the documentary evidence we have supports the idea that the flight that took place on that day may have matched criterion 1 but did not match criteria 2 and 3. That is, it was launched in (arguably) the right time frame but contained equipment (a sonobouy) that was not reported at the “crash” site and did not contain equipment (a Constant Level controller) that would have been necessary to get it to the “crash” site. That, in a nutshell, is the argument.

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • Setting the balloon/Mogul debate aside for a moment, let me pose this question to visitors here:

    Why did Walter Haut issue a press release stating that the Army had captured a "flying disk"?

    Isn't that a strange thing to come up with, out of the blue?

    That is, why would anyone, in the military or any other agency, provide a "press release" that specifically mentions a "flying disk" when there were a number of possibilities open to them for something unusual that happened on or near Roswell in July 1947?

    What prompted Haut to identify the happening's central importance as a captured flying disc?

    In the context of 1947, when flying saucers or disks were an obscure, new, barely acknowledged phenomenon, why would anyone choose to make that the brunt of a press release or news item, unless there was something specific to make them do so?

    It doesn't make sense, unless...

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • RR: "What prompted Haut to identify the happening's central importance as a captured flying disc?"

    I'll just assert that neither Blanchard, nor Marcel, nor Haut were men who would have on their own initiative made such a public statement in the name of the army. I'll defend the assertion if someone objects.

    "In the context of 1947, when flying saucers or disks were an obscure, new, barely acknowledged phenomenon, why would anyone choose to make that the brunt of a press release or news item, unless there was something specific to make them do so?"

    On July 2, the army announced a formal investigation of the flying disk phenomenon. This did not mean, or was not limited to, military sightings. Army counter intelligence was investigating civilian cases (the Roswell incident is a civilian case), for example Rhodes in Phoenix, and they finally got around to Kenneth Arnold.

    The army investigation was announced to the press. It was not secret. By July 8, it was well underway. If the RAAF thought it had a disk, there existed a procedure for reporting it.

    "It doesn't make sense, unless..."

    ...it was a hoax (possibly someone at the RAAF), or the flying disk press release was part of a cover-up.

    They chose "flying disk" because that's the language locals were using (or, more likely, 'flying saucer') to discuss whatever the army wanted to cover-up. They took the incident out of civilian hands and moved it quickly to Ft Worth, Wright, the Pentagon...anyplace but Roswell. Thus, except for Kellahin (who was a Roswell native) and his photographer/technician
    Adair, no news people went to Roswell. Even Kellahin didn't stick around.

    What could have been covered-up by the flying disk story was ET, because the ET concept, although it existed, was not fully formed in 1947 and the general association of ET with flying disks would have to wait a few more years, they might not have associated what was found, if it were ET, with the flying disks, as would become common soon enough. So, it would be possible to cover-up ET with a flying disk story in 1947.

    There are other possibilities, besides ET, both mundane and fantastic.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • Don:

    I always enjoy your conjectures.

    One thing that troubles me is, not your conjecture here, but, rather, the idea of a "cover-up."

    The Watgergate era made the term "cover-up" (and linguistically, "point in time") de rigueur for those who have a conspiratorial bent about the government.

    (Even Eisenhower had great trepidation about the military-industrial complex back in the 50s,
    as you know.)

    But I'm not convinced that a concerted effort to deceive was endemic to the Roswell story, at least, not in an "evil" way.

    Something was being hidden from media and the public, surely, but what was it?

    Was it an ET presence? Or something more prosaic or relevant to "national security"?

    That said, I still don't get why the military and Walter Haut made it a point to specify a "flying disc" in lieu of anything else?

    Why not a militray mishap involving a wayward missile or test airplane?

    Or why not a balloon (Mogul or otherwise) right off the bat?

    Why a flying disk or saucer?

    It doesn't compute.

    If it was a "cover-up," it was a rather bad effort.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • One thing that has never been mentioned before, to my knowledge, is this:

    Is it possible that the debris recovered from the Foster ranch was not the result of one balloon launch but two?

    Brazel says he first discovered the strange debris on June 14. He returned to the site July 4. At some point he gathered up some debris and stored it under some brush or in a shed. Recovery by the military began late July 7 or early July 8. How certain can we be that all the recovered debris, let alone the large amount that was not recovered, came from one balloon launch? Brazel was mystified by aspects of the stuff. But it was not all new to him. He & Marcel tried even making a kite out of it.

    Skeptics have over-focused on Mogul, but we do not know about each and every balloon-with-radar-reflector launch that took place in NM (or elsewhere nearby) at that time.

    Brazel had found balloons before and was almost used to them (so he claimed). But where did these originate? Nobody ever researched these because nobody cared, and the dates are unknown. But perhaps therein lies a clue. Did all that wreckage or debris necessarily arise from one launch?

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • Christopher:

    You make my point.

    It seems that there is a possibility of some balloon launches (other than Mogul) going astray and ending up in the vicinity of Roswell in 1947.

    Some of the accoutrements to those balloon launches were bizarre or unknown by those not privy to the experiments, and would not be easily identified.

    I once posted, at UFO UpDates, yes, that place, a link to a list of hundreds of balloon launches in the Roswell time-frame.

    Richard Hall excoriated me for not breaking out the relevant launches for him and others.

    I told him to find the launches himself. They were there, for all to see if they exerted a little effort.

    (I got the list from a relatively unknown NASA archive. I still have the list and have posted some of the material online at our UFO site or one of our UFO blogs, even this one, early on.)

    The launches were many, and unaccounted for in the Roswell "research" by such fanatics as Rudiak, Randle, and Friedman.

    Your comment about two possible balloons being strewn, perhaps, around the Foster ranch and nearby sites should spur someone to pursue the matter, rather than continuing to try and convince Roswell mavens that Mogul 4 didn't happen.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • CDA said:

    “Is it possible that the debris recovered from the Foster ranch was not the result of one balloon launch but two?”

    What do you estimate the mathematical probability to be that two balloons launched at two random locations and times in the middle of New Mexico would end up—let’s say—within 100 meters of each other in space and within 1 month of each other in time? I would guess it is so infinitesimally small that it likely didn’t happen even once in the lifetime of the universe.

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • RR wrote:

    "Don:

    I always enjoy your conjectures.

    One thing that troubles me is, not your conjecture here, but, rather, the idea of a "cover-up.""

    Choose whatever label works for your "Something was being hidden from media and the public, surely..."

    "...those who have a conspiratorial bent about the government."

    I've nothing to say about the government and the Roswell incident. The only question I have about the "cover up" is whether the CIC instigated it, or if they encountered an existing army "cover up".

    What do you mean by "government"?

    "That said, I still don't get why the military and Walter Haut made it a point to specify a "flying disc" in lieu of anything else?"

    The best answer I've come up with is that they said "flying disk" because that's how local people referred -- disk or saucer -- to whatever lost its structural integrity and neatly arrayed itself in little pieces across 200 yards of Foster Ranch. We have evidence of that in the news stories.

    Although the army had a consensus understanding of what it meant by flying disk, it was unique to them. There was no consensus otherwise.
    People wanted to know what they were because they did not know what they were.
    That ambiguity was useful in a description. It could mean what the army meant by flying disk, it could mean ET, it could mean a Soviet craft, it could mean a classified domestic craft, it could mean whatever anyone imagined a flying disk would be.

    I'd guess the RAAF's pr nightmare would be rumors of radiation killing sheep. There may have been a procedure drawn up to deal with it -- as a rumor. I don't think any such materials were stored at the RAAF, dunno. The RAAF, and surrounds, had its share of airplane crashes during that timeframe. There would be procedures for that event, too.

    "...but what was it?"

    I like to find an emphasis in McEvoy's editorial title

    "And Now What Is It?"

    I try not to ask what it was. It tends to 'inform' the research towards it. I'd rather see where the information leads, how it develops.

    Roger Ebert summed up the movie "Pi"

    "When you're looking for something that doesn't exist, it makes you crazier the closer you get to it."

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Thursday, December 16, 2010  

  • Sourcerer said:

    “I'll just assert that neither Blanchard, nor Marcel, nor Haut were men who would have on their own initiative made such a public statement in the name of the army. I'll defend the assertion if someone objects.”

    Absolutely agree. All of those individuals would have been aware of the significance of such a statement and would not have done it without “top cover” from someone above them.

    A few things can be said about the press release, regardless of what it’s ultimate source turns out to be.

    1) It clearly associated the incident with the expectation of providing an explanation for the flying disks or saucers (I consider the two terms to be virtually synonymous) that were then in the public mind.
    2) It was proactive or, optional, if you wish. It was not in response to any action or question that was publicly known at that point in time. They released it when they did for their own motives, whatever those may have been.
    3) It established the idea in the public mind that the Army Air Force was in control of the situation, in possession of the knowledge (without, importantly, revealing what the knowledge was) and therefore established the precedent that they should be the authority on the subject in the future.

    Coincidentally, these 3 factors set up perfectly the Ramey press conference in which the explanation was revealed to be balloons. To me, this has Counter Intelligence Corps written all over it.

    By Blogger Larry, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Larry:

    While the laws of probability favor your comment, the possibility of two balloon launches, since there were so many in the time period, can not be ruled out by probability.

    Moreover, the launches wouldn't have had to happen in a short period of time but over a span of weeks or months.

    Lost balloons and their arrays were not few, as Moore's papers and other documents show.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Don:

    That an agency of the military of government would use "flying disk" to assuage the population of Roswell and the area, along with media, indicates a batch of nincompoops apparently.

    And to use the idea that Rudiak and the ET crowd prefer -- that Roswell, as the center of Atomic operations, contained men skilled (and professional) in the extreme, one would think that they'd be less inclined to use a term -- flying disk -- creating controversy than some other explanation for the mishap, no matter what it really was.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Larry:

    One might suggest that the excitement of "capturing a flying saucer" overtook those who issued the press release or had Haut do so and no premeditated "cover story" was thought of in that monumental discovery.

    The continuing thesis that the CIC or any other agency had a plan in place to "cover" flying saucer incidents, so early in the saucer sighting era is hard to swallow.

    We, all of us, keep using the current mind-set of sneaky, devious government activity which wasn't so blatant in 1947 to explain the machinations of Ramey and Army Air Force.

    It is easier, for some of us, to accept that, perhaps, a flying disk was, indeed, found and the military thought it best to hide that fact, after realizing what they had -- using the balloon fiasco as their "cover."

    Or something other than a flying saucer crash took place -- a la Redfern's theory -- and the military needed to prevent that information from coming out.

    Whatever took place, one can offer that something out of the ordinary happened and what that something really was has been lost because of the mangled investigations over the years by the gaggle of ufological incompetents.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • To Larry:
    The probability would have been low, but nowhere near as low as you suggest. Brazel had found balloons twice before on his ranch, and the ranch occupied several square miles I believe. The launchings were not random, but arose from certain locations over & over again, and some launchings would have consisted of clusters of balloons, maybe with one or more radar targets. There is no telling how many descended (in whole or in part) over the ranch, or how long the various portions had been there, perhaps blowing about in the winds for several weeks.

    I still wonder if the press release was mainly a publicity stunt, to give the AF base a bit of a 'shot in the arm'. Clearly it was both foolish and premature. I am positive that Marcel had recognised the debris for what it was well before it was shipped to Ft Worth, Brazel probably had too, but there were mystery fragments that baffled them, and the fact that it was so widely scattered increased the mystery. But they did try to make a kite out of it.

    Had the original investigators, Moore & Friedman, been more competent and not gone off on their wild ET ideas, we might have learned, from their early interviews with Haut, more about the true origins of the press release. But it is too late, far too late, to remedy this now.

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Yeah clear as spring water, Christopher,

    Out modesty, I would do many to have been in time and place, to be "the first interviewer", and to use a methodology without intentional or non intentional questionnary, methodology, etc.

    NOT guiding the answers whished, to "forced choice" agaisnt the witnesses.

    As the one, methodology, as it is well known to ask witnesses in Cognitive Psychology or in Criminology, in order to minimize such bias, false memories, retrospective falsifications, contaminations, etc.

    Well, that's too late now :(

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • RR: "The continuing thesis that the CIC or any other agency had a plan in place to "cover" flying saucer incidents, so early in the saucer sighting era is hard to swallow."

    Whose thesis is it that the CIC had a cover-up plan in place [on July 8?]?

    I well understand your displeasure at the conspiracy mindset, however there is no need for it regarding the CIC. It's history, mission, behavior are known -- through a glass darkly, mostly. If you dismiss it from consideration because of a disinclination towards anything conspiratorial, then you are merely tossing out the baby with the bathwater.


    "That an agency of the military of government would use "flying disk" to assuage the population of Roswell and the area, along with media, indicates a batch of nincompoops apparently."

    I don't know about "assuage" (or about "government"). It was the language being used according to the press release "The many rumors regarding the flying disk...". The press release has the answer to the rumors "... became a reality yesterday..."

    The Foster Ranch story is not the only disk story making the rounds in Lincoln and Chaves counties at that time.

    "...that Roswell, as the center of Atomic operations, contained men skilled (and professional) in the extreme, one would think that they'd be less inclined to use a term -- flying disk -- creating controversy than some other explanation for the mishap, no matter what it really was."

    But they weren't "less inclined" as they obviously used "flying disk". No intensity of personal incredulity about it can change it.

    As for balloons and Brazel's find, he said it wasn't a balloon. I see no reason to doubt him so far. Even balloon launch personnel would report seeing disks, including Mogul guys and even Moore, who resonded to Menzel's mirage debunkery with the Brazel-like ""What I saw was not a mirage; it was a craft with highly unusual performance. It was not a balloon".



    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Don:

    I'm trying to say that I think a flying saucer crashed and the military gathered it up.

    The balloon story is a whitewash.

    Tony Bragalia has gathered material that supports a flying saucer incident.

    What that flying disk/saucer consisted of or where it came from remains open in my mind.

    I accept the Haut press release as true in substance.

    I don't accept the Ramey debris story and photos as representative of what happened.

    I think Marcel Sr. was an honest guy.

    I think Rudiak and his ilk have gotten sidetracked by tangents, so anxious are they to "prove" that the saucer was an ET craft.

    I think the military instigated a cover story, and was successful in that effort, pretty much.

    Does that help you understand by "devil's advocation"?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Richie wrote : I accept the Haut press release as true in substance.

    French Newby question : What if?

    If W.Haut, as Press linked, have a sort of an agreement, a "due", something with Roswell medias? A Sort of, "you gimme infos, never me, but now...).

    Dunno if clear... ?

    I think to have read such ignored "hypothesis" here or there (in correct english).

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Gilles:

    If I understand you correctly (ahem), I don't think there was a quid pro quo between Haut and Roswell media.

    I think Haut provided what he was instructed to provide, and it was a real release of what the Army thought it had.

    What that thing was remains an open question in my mind.

    When the balloon story was proffered by Ramey and the Army, the fickle press and public abandoned the story until it was revived by Friedman 30 years later.

    By that time, what really happened was muddled by bad ufological investigation and the fallible memories of those involved in the incident in 1947.

    Today we find UFO mavens trying to unravel the true details of the event, but the UFO ET crowd continues to muddy the waters with their fanatic belief system.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • "If W.Haut, as Press linked, have a sort of an agreement, a "due", something with Roswell medias? A Sort of, "you gimme infos, never me, but now...)."

    Do you mean Haut might "leak" to the Roswell media in exchange for a subscription to the Daily Record, or for 10% off a classified ad with the Morning Dispatch?

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Don:

    Hahahahahaha

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • I agree with Rich. I have always held out that balloons of some sort were perhaps also involved in the Roswell crash...

    In fact, it was skeptic Karl Plock himself (who was originally a Roswell "believer") in his 1994 book "Roswell in Perspective" that said that the debris which was found by Brazel may have come from an extraterrestrial craft which had either collided with the Project Mogul balloon (or other balloon) - or which may have made a violent maneuver in order to avoid a collision, in some way causing both the balloon and the UFO to crash.

    A large balloon array may have somehow enmeshed, entangled or impacted in a way that interrupted the operation of the craft. Or perhaps the craft had to suddenly avert course to prevent such a thing from occuring.

    AJB

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • "Do you mean Haut might "leak" to the Roswell media in exchange for a subscription to the Daily Record, or for 10% off a classified ad with the Morning Dispatch?"

    Hum, yes, in essence, Don.

    I think W. Haut have had a "due" to Roswell Medias...

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Friday, December 17, 2010  

  • Gilles:

    Surely you jest.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • RR: "I accept the Haut press release as true in substance."

    I don't accept the consensus story, including the details in the press release and the Brazel interview.

    The RAAF, the Sheriff's office, the radio stations and the newspapers are supposed to have had the area's phone system tied up with calls from all over the world. How much Roswell-originated information was published by the news media that was not already in the press release?

    What seems to have been calls to Wilcox are on the wires soon after the story broke. This introduces Brazel, the previously unidentified rancher. Sometime later, the AP carries a story that, according to other stories, Haught told reporters he had been chastized.

    That's about it, I think. The first is so close to the press release that it might as well have been part of it (finally getting 'Wilcox' right and identifying the rancher), and the second might be a self-generated media rumor rather than from a Roswell source, because no such story has been found, and the mechanics of individually informing "reporters" of it serially, one after the other over the phone, is ...not in the cards, and because no local reporters mention Haut calling a press conference to inform them about it.

    Even if the press release was god's own truth and there was no more information to be got, I would still expect something -- rumor, hearsay, joke, lunacy, basically anything instead of nothing.

    It seems unnatural.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Don:

    We've been dealing with press releases for over 40 years, with our MediaWatch operation and our sojourns in media.

    When a release is issued, by a police or government agency or a business, that's it.

    News media gets it, and what they do with it is up to them.

    Sometimes they publish or report the release in toto or essence, sometimes they ignore it or only give it a brief resume.

    Haut's release was exactly the kind of release one would expect and what we still see in releases to this day.

    It contains as much information as is desired to be imparted, but also contains the "excitement" of an interesting find or event.

    What happened after Haut released the information doesn't detract from what the release purports to tell.

    You want to denigrate the release because nothing transpired from it in a way that you think is substantial.

    If you're familiar with the workings of media and how releases are handled, you know that no one issues a press release, then has a news conference about the information...not unless the release forces one to elaborate, the very thing a release is meant to thwart.

    This is the problem with the ufological mind-set: it supposes that things work or should the way that makes things clear, and that's not how the world works or why press releases are instigated.

    That the follow-up to Haut's information doesn't go in the direction that you, Rudiak, and others would like annoys you.

    That's unfortunate, and part of the Roswell problem.

    That's why we're still discussing an incident that should have been set aside long ago, because it has been a major distraction in the study of the UFO phenomenon.

    (We, also, by continuing to raise this dead issue are part of the problem, admittedly.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Richie wrote : "Surely you jest."

    Hum nop. In an emission about Roswell in National Geographic channel, Haut said about Haut something like:

    "He owed me a scoop, because shortly before he gave tips to someone else without telling me."

    (it is not the exact Haut terms for the second part of the sentence, because his voice is covered by the french translator in the emission in french I have, and I cant heard exactly what Haut saids).

    I've always been intrigued by this Haut speech, and then about the real "root" and origines of the 509th "release" gived to Joyce.

    The problem is that the 3 other medias seems to have had the same release, so Joyce wasn't so privilegiated.

    But, one more time, that's "very" intriguing, and interesting, at least for me ^^

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Erf.

    Joyce said about Haut, and not Haut said about Haut ^^

    Sorry.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • RR:

    "You want to denigrate the release because nothing transpired from it in a way that you think is substantial."

    "That the follow-up to Haut's information doesn't go in the direction that you, Rudiak, and others would like annoys you."


    What annoys me are stupid replies to my posts.


    Do you want to try again?


    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Roswell is not "a dead issue", much though we might like it to be.

    Officially it is certainly dead, but as long as ufologists keep it alive it will flourish for decades to come. Personally I would hope it does gradually die out, as I cannot see what further progress can be made, but as AJB for one intends to keep it alive, so we skeptics have to be ready to respond, thereby keeping it more alive.

    But in the end nobody makes any real progress. The last person to offer a really new explanation, Nick Redfern, got a cold reception from ETHers and skeptics alike. Likewise, anyone else who dares to offer something new is likely to get shouted down.

    It is one of those cases that is dead, yet alive, if you see what I mean. Is the term for this 'undead'?

    By Blogger cda, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Our friend Gilles has a correction to his comment about Haut's possible "quid pro quo."

    Here's Gilles' corrective:

    In an emission about Roswell on the National Geographic channel, Joyce said about Haut something like:

    "He owed me a scoop, because shortly before he gave tips to someone else without telling me."

    (It is not Joyce's exact words for the second part of the sentence, because his voice is covered by the French translator in the emission in French I have, and I can't hear exactly what Joyce said).

    I've always been intrigued by [what Joyce apparently said], and then about the real "root" and origins of the 509th "release" given to Joyce.

    The problem is that the three other [news] media seem to have had the same release, so Joyce wasn't so privileged.

    But, one more time, it's "very" intriguing, and interesting, at least for me...

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Don:

    If I've missed your point, please enlighten me.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • CDA:

    Yes, you have it exactly right, figuratively...

    Roswell is the UFO zombie story.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Gilles, both Art McQuiddy and Haut referred to the relationship between the Roswell news media and the RAAF. There may have been others who spoke about the subject.

    The RAAF was the major news source for them. They were competitive and complained if they were scooped if the RAAF PIO gave the information first to another rather than them.

    The two radio stations, obviously could broadcast a bulletin anytime, plus all four were subscribers to wire services, and although they could not send, they were "stringers" for the services and could call in a story.

    Haut said Blanchard wanted no problems with civilians and created a cycling through the four in order.

    Both McQuiddy and Haut say KGFL was the first to received the flying disk press release. This means KGFL was at the bottom of the list for the previous RAAF press release, and that's why Haut 'owed' KGFL the next release, which happened to be the flying disk one.

    George Walsh at KSWS and, according to the Albuquerque Journal during the Witness Era, Frank Joyce at KGFL, received a phone call from Haut regarding the press release, giving both radio stations a heads up.

    I cannot find any information whether Haut ever had contact with the RDR that day. I've asked investigators, and those who bothered to respond said they do not know if he did. The RDR did not run the same press release story as the radio stations. McQuiddy, who has his times mixed up, may have heard from Haut by phone "a little before noon", which if he did would clear up his time sequence.

    McQuiddy lists the same order as Haut except he leaves out the RDR. In a televised interview McQuiddy seems to have an issue with naming the RDR at all.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • RR: "Don:

    If I've missed your point, please enlighten me."

    You wrote:

    "When a release is issued, by a police or government agency or a business, that's it."

    "News media gets it, and what they do with it is up to them."

    And what they did with it, according to the consensus story, is jam the phone lines in Roswell calling, not only the RAAF, but the radio stations and newspaper offices (remember, they were all "stringers"), as well as the Sheriff. Maybe they tried the Mayor, the Police Chief...whoever.

    But no additional information is reported that I can find in the news stories besides what I noted.

    Perhaps Gilles can discuss the odds that no addtional information...hearsay, rumor, jokes, lunacy would not be told over hours of phone calls to an variety of people on a hot topic.

    The July 9 RDR editorial describes a volume of phone calls, but they are calls from locals responding to the Daily Record's story, not newsmen from elsewhere.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Don:

    I think (and thought) I understood what you wrote.

    My statement was that I believe that Haut's release was the Roswell story, and his release summed up the incident.

    Whatever happened afterwards, by media, sringers, radio stations, Ramey, et al. has nothing to do with the release itself.

    The release is a thing unto itself.

    The aftermath is an extrapolation.

    That extrapolation is infuriating to you, CDA, and even me, among others.

    The release's information wasn't dealt with sensibly by media, law enforcement, or the people of Roswell.

    And to this day the release itself is encumbered by the Roswell effluvium that various UFO investigators have produced by their shoddy and inept "research."

    CDA makes the point that other possibilities for the Roswell event are shouted down, most loudly by the ET proponents.

    I see Haut's release as idiomatic; that is, we can accept as it is (or not).

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • RR, your 40 years of media experience should alert you to the difference between a news story and what that news story was about.

    There are two Roswell incidents, 1, the fact of the press release, and 2, what the press release was about.

    The reporting in 1947 and the investigations post-197...something, were about 2. It wasn't until after Ft Worth that the wire services considered 1. What they did was to assign blame, the UP named Blanchard, and the AP blamed "Haught". The Daily Record neither mentions the press release nor Haut at all, and blamed no one, simply identifying the flying disk story to "the army".

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • (cont)

    I am researching 1 and the news cycle of which it is a part, never separate from it. The press release cannot be taken in isolation, just as Roswell itself cannot be viewed in isolation in its moment in history.

    I question every detail in the news story. I also note the details that were not followed up on at any time, of which there are several.

    The point of the research is to verify the news stories, not to make a statement about what the news story was about.

    It is entirely legit to fact-check the jammed phone lines story.

    As for Tony's unpublished information and Nick's book, what I said to Randle "Information that cannot be accessed might as well not exist."


    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Don:

    The bone of contention stems from my writing that I take the Haut release at face value.

    Of course, all of the circumstances should be weighed when it comes to an incident such as Roswell.

    But I only wanted to make clear that I find no fault or deviousness with Haut's release.

    What transpired because of it is another matter.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • RR "The bone of contention stems from my writing that I take the Haut release at face value."

    I don't think the text of the press release has been identified. The consensus has it, I think, that it is "Haught's Statement". For the purpose of discussion I agree to that, but with an 'asterisk'.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Thank you Richie for the "corrective" and Don for your reply.

    Yep Don, there was (or at least it seems or it is transpiring, for my humble person) a closed relationship between Roswell news medias and the 509th.

    It is "why" (I believe) it would be important to contextualize the 509th release in regard to this relationship, and then, maybe or not, to "decrease" the importance of its release.

    I mean that some Roswell investigators gives or gave "more" importance its release merits.

    I mean that maybe, all of it, at the start, was a "local" matter, about something very new (the Flying Saucer or Disks media subjects), a sort of "I will give pleasure and subtance to local medias regarding our relationships". Period.

    In other words, I ask myself (without clear answer) about what the protagonists (Haut, Blanchard if associated) really have in mind when giving that Press release to Roswell medias. I have the high impression all of it was "standard", common.

    In my mind, if something really extraordinary was found, I have difficulties to understand why such protagonists have advised the "local" news medias.

    Sincerly sorry, I dunno the term "fait divers" in english as journalism idiomatic french expression.

    But, due to this relationship between 509th and local medias, I ask myself if finaly, the 509th have released a sort of "fait divers" cause in very good relationships with local news medias, and finaly something not really important for them (then nothing extraordinary). Dunno if clear ?

    Blanchard left the base the 8 or 9 July in order to go on hollidays and to organize and to proclaim the Air Force Day, for example...

    In essence, but maybe I'm wrong, this Press release was just something which much be appreciated (as banal) in this context of relationships between 509th and local news medias: A detail, something non-significant in reality.

    A sort of "non-event" at its starts (when 509th gived a release to news medias) which have launched a "butterfly effect" despite totaly "banal", "anodine", in reality.

    Thank you for your time, and sincerly sorry of the level of my english ;)

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • I am always suspicious of phrases like "jammed phone lines". Often when I contact my doctor's surgery the line is engaged. One minute later it is free. This constitutes a "jammed phone line", provided one person found he could not get through the first time (but could perhaps a minute or two later).

    You may regard the various jammed lines in Roswell in the same way. If one person contacts a newspaper saying he could not get through to the destination, it gets magnified into a jammed phone line.

    By Blogger cda, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Gilles, I don't know how many plausible mundane rationales can be made for the press release, but none of them have any evidence to support them. All they are is plausible.

    If there were a plausible explanation, it should have been made by the Army in 1947, or by the USAF in 1995. They did not. They do not acknowledge that they are the cause and origin of the "Roswell myth".

    How hard could it have been? What made this incident different from Circleville (and others)?

    What reason would the air force have for perpetuating the "myth" by not offering a plausible mundane story?

    Besides, if it had been a plausible mundane story, why not have written the press release that way in the first place, instead of as a cliffhanger of a chapter in a serial?

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Cda, it wasn't the people attempting to call who mention the volume of calls, but the persons receiving the calls.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Saturday, December 18, 2010  

  • Part 1.
    RR said: "The continuing thesis that the CIC or any other agency had a plan in place to "cover" flying saucer incidents, so early in the saucer sighting era is hard to swallow."

    To which Sourcerer replied: “Whose thesis is it that the CIC had a cover-up plan in place [on July 8?]?”

    Well, I’m the one who had the temerity to suggest that the combination of the Haut press release followed quickly by the Ramey press conference had the structure of a planned series of events designed to manage public opinion regarding “flying disks”, so maybe I can say a few more things in defense of this idea.

    A couple of years ago I had occasion to spend a fair number of days at the National Archives (NARA) in College Park Maryland researching the communications of the US Military general staff from the beginning of WWII through the end of 1947. The emphasis was on the Chief of Staff (General Marshall) and his principal direct subordinates responsible for Intelligence and Counter Intelligence. My purpose was to see if there was any material that would shed light on the origins of the Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit (discussed in an earlier thread by AJB) such as when it was started, and by whom. I did not find any “smoking guns”, but the NARA staff did verifiy to me the basic facts laid out by AJB, namely that the IPU did exist as an organization within the Army CIC and reported to the guy who reported to Marshall. The records and responsibilities of the IPU were, indeed, handed off to the Air Force some time after it was established as an independent agency in September, 1947. The records and responsibilities were handed off to AFOSI as part of BLUEBOOK.

    By Blogger Larry, at Sunday, December 19, 2010  

  • Part 2.
    This set of facts verifies that the topic of interest to the IPU was UFOs, Flying Disks, or whatever other term you want to use to connote the idea of ET vehicles. And it verifies that the topic remained within the purview of Counter Intelligence. We don’t know how big the IPU was in terms of number of individuals involved or its budget, we do know it actually reported at the highest possible level within the Military Intelligence structure. So, the IPU had to have already been in existence in September of 1947; otherwise, it could not have been started under the Army and then been handed off to the Air Force. That means that unless the IPU was started some time in the two month period prior to September, 1947, it was already in existence by July 8.

    By Blogger Larry, at Sunday, December 19, 2010  

  • Part 3.

    If the IPU was already in existence at the time of the Roswell event, that would imply that “Interplanetary Phenomena” was already considered a subject of national security by Army CIC by that point in time. If it was considered a sensitive and compartmented national security secret (as I believe it would), then it is a virtual certainty that pre-existing plans for cover stories would have been thought about prior to being needed. Every compartmented project is actually required to have a security plan in place, including cover stories, when it starts up. A good example contemporaneous with Roswell were the elaborate cover stories concocted to cover the first atomic bomb test at Trinity site, of which there were several—to cover a variety of different contingencies.

    If, on the other hand the IPU came into existence in precisely the two month window between the Roswell event and the time when the Air Force became an independent agency, then it would be hard to avoid speculating that it started up as a result of the Roswell event, would it not?

    By Blogger Larry, at Sunday, December 19, 2010  

  • Larry makes some valuable points, and I might direct readers here to Anthony Bragalia's take on the IPU in an earlier post (below).

    As usual, we have strayed from the Roswell balloon aspect that this post started out with.

    That going-off-topic is endemic to UFO mavens, and it happens at Kevin Randle's blog regularly.

    I would hope we'd stay on point in future, just to pretend we all are able to be intellectual when we discuss UFOs or anything else.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, December 19, 2010  

  • Larry:
    Are you sayng that you found no documentation indicating that the IPU existed, but that someone at the archives told you it did exist?

    You say that the IPU did exist within the army CIC and it reported to someone fairly high up, who reported to Marshall.

    Who was this guy? And if the records of the IPU were handed over to Bluebook, where are these records? Are they in the BB archives?

    I am not persuaded that this IPU, whatever it was, was ever a functioning body within the Army or the Air Force. It may well have been a 'talking shop' or an informal group of people interested in UFOs, but no more than that. If it was a real committee, reporting to Marshall (or MacArthur) who was on it? It begins to sound similar to MJ-12 but without any names.

    Unless you can unearth some real documentation, and not rely solely on memories of others (who were obviously not on it themselves), we are getting nowhere.

    And no, I am not persuaded that any such committee existed before July 8 or that it was formed just after that date either.

    Once again it is the old story: no documentation to prove anything, just word of mouth many decades afterwards. In fact, a story without foundation.

    To RR: Sorry to prolong this topic.

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, December 19, 2010  

  • No problem CDA...

    We all go on tangents, when the original topic leads us there.

    It's almost unavoidable.

    But, again, I suggest that readers look at Bargalia's IPU post earlier here -- only a few posts down.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, December 19, 2010  

  • Further to my last post:

    There are some titbits on the IPU in Tim Good's book ABOVE TOP SECRET. Unfortunately the info stems from William Steinman, and relates to the aftermath of the Aztec crash (not Roswell). The IPU apparently operated out of Camp Hale, Colorado. Its main function was "to collect and deliver disabled or crashed discs to certain specified secret locations". Steinman says Gen Marshall was informed about the Aztec crash, and he then alerted MJ-12 and the IPU. The IPU then recovered the crashed disc 12 miles east of Aztec. Several names pop up, and guess what - they are the same names as appeared on MJ-12.

    Sorry, but this whole IPU tale sounds more and more fishy the more you examine it. Just an extra part of the MJ-12 tale in fact.

    Can Larry obtain any real documentation to show otherwise? And who was his informant at the NARA?

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, December 19, 2010  

  • Larry, I was thinking of a CIC operation that would become what we know as the Roswell incident.

    July 2 stories General Twining announced the army was now officially investigating the flying disks and that Wright was the collection point for any information. Although Twining is quoted referring to the Pacific Northwest reports, we know they were investigating reports in the southwest. It ramps up very quickly which indicates to me that planning for it had been ongoing, probably due to significant sightings over military bases earlier.

    Following the holiday weekend, the FBI and CIC are investigating civilian sightings together, including Arnold's. On July 8, a CIC agent obtains Rhodes' photos from the Arizona Republic. Both the CIC and FBI investigate the case.

    At the high point of the 47 Wave, we have the Roswell incident. Does it somehow fit into a planned debunking of the disks, or is it a 'black swan'? The reported 'landing' of the "flying object" "some time last week" matches well with the ramp-up of the investigation -- was the Roswell incident a cause of the ramp-up?

    The complete lack of engagement by the air force re the press release remains for me "The curious incident of the dog in the night-time"

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Sunday, December 19, 2010  

  • If the Roswell incident was a mundane event, the press release ought to have been mundane. It wasn't.

    Whether or not the incident was mundane, there was no compelling reason for the RAAF to issue a press release or get proactive in any way. But they issued a press release and got proactive.

    The army in 1947 and the USAF in 1995 ignored the press release.

    A mundane reason for a press release is the story was already known, if not in Roswell, then in Lincoln County. The 1947 stories strongly support this.

    A mundane reason for a flying disk press release is because that was what was rumored to have landed on the Foster Ranch.

    Maybe balloons and kites were involved, but the 'flying disk' of the press release could not have referred to them -- if it did, then the USAF should explain how and why.

    That Mogul was classified is no excuse. The public was well-aware of secret scientific and military projects, and probably imagined more than there were. There is no reason for the army to not have said it was classified, and therefore its "appearance" or "construction" could not be "revealed". No problemo for the US public in 1947.

    My opinion ("at this point in time", heh) is that the army knew the story was out of its control and attempted to gain control by misdirection from Lincoln County to Roswell to Ft Worth and beyond, if necessary, while it 'sanitized' the situation in Lincoln County.

    It is possible that something went awry around noon on the 8th in Roswell, but the army recovered from it by that evening.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Monday, December 20, 2010  

  • Don:

    The facts of the press release, as far as we know, are as follows:

    1. Haut is notified by Blanchard that a flying disc has been recovered from a ranch. Haut is NOT told any details, so his natural assumption is that it was disc shaped, as per Arnold and some later reports.

    2. Haut at no time ever saw the disc himself. Blanchard told him he could not see it. (See THE ROSWELL INCIDENT for this information, based on the early interviews with Haut in 1979)

    3. Haut therefore wrote his release without knowing the full facts, or any dates, shape, size, description or whatever. He did not even know the rancher's name. The release was a rushed job.

    What happened after this we can only speculate. Haut therefore would have been very surprised to learn within a few hours that the said 'disc' was only a balloon plus radar reflector. But the point is that Haut NEVER saw the debris for himself. But he still did what he was told and prepared this early release.

    As to the motivation for the release at the time, we simply do not know, and never will. It may have been the desire for publicity for the RAAF base. As I have said before, it was foolish and premature. But it is very likely that the 'disc' was identified (by Marcel, Brazel & Cavitt) BEFORE the release hit the wires. But it was too late; the release had gone out and the damage was done.

    You can speculate forever on this. I cannot see what further progress you can make on it 6 decades later.

    Also, bear in mind what Haut wrote in his second affidavit shortly before his death. (His first one was in 1993, already 14 years after the first interviews). Clearly his tale got way out of hand and became, in effect, worthless. This second affidavit was not written by him anyway, but 'coached' from him by Don Schmitt.

    But we are not debating the affidavits, so where do we go from here? What progress do you expect to make, in 2010, on his 1947 press release?

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, December 20, 2010  

  • Cda: "The facts of the press release, as far as we know, are as follows..."

    The only fact we know is that it was on the wires at 2:26pm MT.

    Haut's story is uncorroborated. There is no reason to take it as gospel, unless you have information from someone else for your 1-3. I can't even find out if any investigators corroborated Haut having contact with the RDR on the 8th. Apparently, not.

    The Army already had a procedure in place for reporting on the flying disks. Blanchard would have called Wright field or General Ramey (which I think he did) and reported it. That he issued the press release was on their say so. It was not on Haut.

    I think in 1947 Haut was an intelligent and resourceful young man, and Blanchard knew it and utilized his abilities.

    "What progress do you expect to make, in 2010, on his 1947 press release?"

    Maybe break down the ingrained consensus on it. Sometimes things are hidden in plain sight.

    I hope to find out more of other sources of information about the Foster Ranch incident.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Monday, December 20, 2010  

  • Looking for information on balloons and Roswell, I found reference to Galganski's report on the CUFOS website. According to Galganski it would take 40 Mogul trains to produce the debris field as described by Marcel Sr. Since the Brazel field from the interview is a smaller estimate, it would take fewer but still more than one train.

    Assuming Galganski is right or nearly so, there was no such volume of balloons and their kites that could have landed then and there.

    Yet, there can be no doubt that what Brazel is describing is a balloon(s) and kite(s) even though he contradicts this by stating, in the RDR, it was not a balloon, and in the bylined Kellahin AP version "It was not a kite".

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Tuesday, December 21, 2010  

  • (cont)

    In the Witness Era, the materials are described as having a 'likeness' to other things. Those things are like balloon kite materials, but with characteristics that are not those of the mundane materials balloon kites were made of.

    I know of no statement from 1947 of this 'likeness', but it is obvious that Brazel was both fascinated and disturbed by the stuff. He brought it to the attention of his neighbors, spoke of it probably in Corona, possibly in Carrizozo and maybe Tularosa.

    Brazel is quoted as saying he was "ashamed" mentioning it, and "whispered kinda confidential-like" about it. It is unlikely he was "ashamed" because he called it a flying disk. There is no direct evidence he did. He said he was told it might be a disk by his brother-in-law. He was not "ashamed" because he might be ridiculed, that folks would laugh at him for doing so. It was "folks", his peers, who brought the disks to his attention.

    He was embarrased because he didn't know what it was and he thought he should. He was "ashamed" at his presumed ignorance.


    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Tuesday, December 21, 2010  

Post a Comment

<< Home