The UFO Iconoclast(s)

Saturday, January 19, 2013

The New Yorker Exegesis of Roswell (and Kevin Randle's Blog Visitors)

The current issue of The New Yorker [1/21/2013] has on page 24 an article by the magazine's financial writer, James Surowiecki; That Sunk-Cost Feeling.

The piece is about the New York Jets but applies, interestingly, to the ongoing Roswell debate at Kevin Randle's blog.

Mr. Surowiecki cites Ohio State psychologist Hal Arkes who is an expert on a financial dilemma known as "sunk-cost."

Surowwiecki writes, "...in the real world sunk costs are hard to ignore" and quoting Arkes, adds ... "Abandoning a project that you've invested a lot in feels like you've wasted everything, and waste is something we've been told to avoid."

"This means," Surowiecki continues, "that we often end up sticking with something when we'd be better off cutting our losses."

He goes on, "The sunk-cost dilemma isn't just about waste. It's also about reputation ... if you keep a foundering project alive there's always a chance that it will right itself."

"Giving up on a project, though, means that somebody has to admit that he shouldn't have done it in the first place," Arkes says.

"So how do you counter the problem? Surowiecki asks.

"Taking the original decision-maker out of the picture and letting a fresh pair of eyes look at the pros and cons can help," Arkes offers.

This is, in a nutshell, the problem with the discussions about Roswell, and especially the ongoing, never-ending tripe in the comment section of Kevin Randle's blog/

Everyone who comments there does so with such elaborate energy and prose that none are willing to give up the ghost.

They will die arguing, endlessly, about inconsequential Roswell minutiae rather than admit that they are in a sunk-cost situation.

One would hope that Kevin Randle would quell the nonsense, but his need for many (bad) comments rather than a few (good) comments is part of -- a large part -- of the problem.

And that problem? A topic that is unresolvable because of the ill-thinking participants in his inadvertent debate.

RR

87 Comments:

  • Perhaps the Roswell ET diehards should take heed of Lance Armstrong. His denials went on and on for years. Then suddenly.....

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, January 20, 2013  

  • Rich: "They will die arguing, endlessly, about inconsequential Roswell minutiae rather than admit that they are in a sunk-cost situation."

    This is true of both skeptics and advocates. They don't want to look at Roswell from "a different perspective", but confronted with such a thing, both sides must first determine whether there is a possibility the different perspective might have a negative impact on their position. If they think it might, they will either ignore it or make some generic and pseudo-plausible reply.

    Both sides already know what Roswell was all about, and evidence of what they know is what they look for. Anything else is suspect.

    Intellectually, they are rigid, frozen in place. Nobody moves, nobody gets hurt. Both sides are fragile and sensitive, emotions on a hair trigger.

    For example, I asked this question: Why did Brazel report his find to the Sheriffs of Chaves County? The Foster Ranch was in Lincoln County and thus not in the Chaves sheriff's jurisdiction.

    According to his son, Bill, in The Roswell Incident:

    "Strangely enough when Dad first got to Roswell it was the weather bureau he called first about the stuff he had found. It was the weather bureau that told him he had better see the sheriff about it." For some reason this is ignored even by skeptics.

    So, The Chaves sheriffs may not have been Brazel's first choice. Maybe the weather bureau in Roswell wasn't his first choice, either. Maybe he did the rational thing and attempted to report it to the Lincoln County sheriffs first.

    If he did, then the story we have is inaccurate, and there are implications if he did, that can change the story in ways that cannot be predicted. So, it is ignored.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • And Don, this....

    I get the feeling that the Brazel debris is one thing and the flying disk another.

    They are intertwined somehow but there are two incidents (or more).

    And they have been co-joined which complicates the matter.

    There were -- and I think Nick Redfern agrees -- a confluence of "incidents" which have since become amalgamated (1978) by inept ufologists.

    Separating the Brazel story, the Roswell intervention, and the Corona "accident" is daunting but not an impossible task to unravel.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • The Roswell Game.
    I think that any game requires cooperation between opposing participants who agree upon not opting out.
    Further the Roswell game is based upon the lure of having factoids that insure the game is un-winnable.
    You can participate compete and cooperate without the possibility of losing the game.
    The other draw is commensurability and coherence in the game which the prize is incommensurable.

    In other words, the game pieces ( factoids) are set pieces, safe, identifiable and transferable among participants. In the actual phenomenon, the game is based upon, this is not so and so it is that like many other conceptual models of games, there are set parameters whereas in the real world, this is not palatable and far from predictable as a linear path.

    Far from it. To attempt to dislodge the game is to participate in it.

    You can drop out, eat a sandwich, go to Brazil and when you return, the game is still there, whereas in the real world this is not so.

    The actual phenomenon is the very embodiment of flux, but the game allows you to participate under set game rules. Nothing is erased, nothing is added. Hence the game has it's lure which is to make the incomprehensible very transferable to prosaic and understandable terms.
    All of this has always seemed obvious.It's fun to play around the edges with the game, trying to switch the markers around...without the thought of ever changing the rules. It is much like the God Game in the plural.



    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • Interesting take, Bruce....and a viable explanation of the Roswell meme.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • Don Wrote:"Strangely enough when Dad first got to Roswell it was the weather bureau he called first about the stuff he had found. It was the weather bureau that told him he had better see the sheriff about it." For some reason this is ignored even by skeptics.

    No, it is not ignored "by skeptics". For example, Christopher pointed it in december 2011 the comment of Kevin's entry http://kevinrandle.blogspot.fr/2011/12/david-rudiak-joins-dream-team.html , as it was during one year time my own signature in our French UFO Skeptic forum...

    It shows probably how Brazel considered the stuffes he found: suffisaly closed to weather apparatus or something like this, to go FIRST to the Weather Office. IF we consider Mogul apparatus, it was not so bad...

    Regards,

    Gilles

    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • Okay fellows...

    Let's not go off on a Kevin Randle tangent.

    The point of my post is that the Roswell debate is a sucker's game.

    There is, at the present time, with the present crowd, no way to resolve anything about Roswell.

    The rehash is foul and rancid.

    Picking up the garbage from Randle's blog or UFO UpDates and moving it here won't dissipate the odorous fumes.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • Bruce: "You can drop out, eat a sandwich, go to Brazil and when you return, the game is still there, whereas in the real world this is not so."

    That's my experience. I spent a few months on a ufo newsgroup with major Roswell threads (I'd never had an interest in UFOs and had not heard of Roswell). Then I forgot all about it for a dozen years.

    I come back and a lot has changed, but skeptics and advocates talking points are unchanged. Nothing new, no movement. And no matter what changed in the real world (Kaufman dead and outed, Ragsdale gone, Haut dead leaving a controversial affidavit etc), nothing has changed; it's same for both sides...although, an aside to Gilles and the skeptics: I think you've forgotten what the rationale for the Mogul story was. Maybe I'll bring it up at the next opportunity on Kevin's blog, and break my rule to never discuss the 'M's (Mogul, MJ12, Memory Metal).

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • Thanks, Don, for potentially going to Kevin's blog, where the Roswell landfill is flush with garbage.

    I have (we have) some unique 1947 material planned for input here; material that impacts the Roswell meme or mythology.

    We'd like to keep the spot here free of the pugnacious rehash that keeps afflicting Kevin's blog.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • Let the 'Dream team' do their work. Let them dream as much as they want. Let them publish their results. And when they do, the rest of us can sit back, relax and perhaps drift off into a dream ourselves.

    Meantime the scientific fraternity will continue as usual, the USAF will continue as usual, and even the earth will continue on its path as usual.

    Humanity will be unchanged, history will likewise be unchanged, and we shall all be absolutely none the wiser.

    Kevin Randle is monumentally uninterested in my views. I wonder if he ever stops to think if the scientific world has any interest, any whatever, in his views, or indeed in any member of the dream team's views.

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • CDA, Christopher...

    I hate to tell you this but some scientists and their labs, along with members of the U.S. military establishment are very interested in what Anthony Bragalia's writes.

    Frank Warren and our guys note that their venues come in to Warren's site and our blogs to check out what Mr. Bragalia has to say.

    They linger too, and take material.

    Why?

    And believe me, it's not just a small contingent.

    It's a vast array of what you would consider the science/military community.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • About six years ago, I put some material about Roswell on the web. For four days the pages were hit hard by connections from Kabul (?!). I think there was a hop to Germany. Maybe there were a bunch of NATO soldiers in Afghanistan longing for stories about Roswell.

    Nothing will get the interest of or excite either Roswell skeptics or advocates unless it promises evidence to support their conclusions. So, it's a dull kind of excitement. A piece of metal found in a field, what someone said someone said they overheard Marcel Sr say once upon a time.

    The stories will go nowhere. Surely both skeptics and advocates knew the metal would be 'lost' or stolen from the mails. And there will be nothing to connect up the 'someone said someone said' to anything else. Someone will come along and waggle a document but won't let it be copied, someone will tell a fascinating story, but wants to be anonymous. Oringbay.

    New information should excite some interest, but it doesn't unless it is obvious it might support one's conclusions, if proved true, but is harmless to them if proved false.

    Gilles connects the skeptical dots: 'I know it was Mogul, therefore Brazel to Weather Bureau = balloon = Mogul.'

    The issue of where Brazel might have gone before doesn't register. I'll take it further: what are the odds after 3 weeks (skeptics' timeframe) the Lincoln County sheriffs hadn't heard the Brazel story?

    The questions I ask may seem irrelevant to the big question of was it a spaceship or not, but I have reasons for asking. I have background info that may be relevant, depending on the answer.


    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • Chris;

    I reminded KDR recently that the scientific world absolutely does not have any interest whatsoever in his or the dream team's views, and I was rewarded by having this much-needed reality check immediately deleted without comment.

    (LOL)

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • "Perhaps the Roswell ET diehards should take heed of Lance Armstrong."

    "Aussie cycling chiefs call Lance Armstrong a delusional, pathological liar."

    I don't think Lance could teach delusional Roswell ETH diehards anything.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Monday, January 21, 2013  

  • "The most salient thing that strikes me is...the incredible and dismaying dichotomy. On the one hand, we [scientists] land a robot on Mars after two decades--and on the very same day, here are all these people buying hot dogs and looking around for space garbage in a rancher's field in New Mexico. And those are the smart ones. The stupid ones are the ones who went to Roswell, Ga., because they didn't know the difference.
    --Harlan Ellison, 1997

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • Another aspect of the Roswell mythos that Don mentioned, is shared by many a cited case of singular or multiple anomalous events is that they are exclusively post editorial while being witness based and not prone to real time examination. Roswell is a case of compounding facts in search of a case. Putting on our Sherlock cap..to recreate whether or not there is even a case worthy of a hat. Do real world investigations seek cause absent an effect?

    Finding cause to justify a theory, rather than a cause that requires a theory is the Roswell game. The focus is on "shards" rather than key motives that are non material.
    We see this ad nauseum.
    A reverse engineering of a theoretical event to find cause.
    The transitional movement toward material documentation to replace witnesses is a even weaker fall back position to reverse engineer the motive of either inadvertent or intentional deception, which the choices even in of themselves weaken a potential versus actual case further to determine the motives. Is this worthy of a means to determine the nature of a phenomenon based on intentional or inadvertent lying strictly by third hand associations?
    So then we see the replacement of means for motive.
    We are speaking of individuals whose motives cannot be revealed by documentation. Even a ream of documents simply of themselves, can be absent of revealing or explaining the players behavior in now absent historical contexts.
    Why did Mr X have a ham sandwich versus a salad in 1947? You will not find that documented directly.
    Even the most elegant ( simple )act, whether it is in the past or in the present is never a solely isolated situation independent of several complicating causing factors, that in the present are absent and untraceable.
    All of this is largely witness based and one of the coldest of cold cases that is compounded by the contamination of the pool of witnesses who are now for the most part, dead as dead can be. A post editorial forensic examination absent it's witnesses who were largely contaminated in the first place, over a theoretical event leads to reverse engineering to produce a theory explaining a theoretical event. Inventing causation post editorially. If this isn't a case of stretching the definition of a viable investigation, I don't know what is.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • BTW
    If the existentialist in me wrote a script on Roswell, I would probably entitle it "Ten Characters in Search of A Play"

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • Zoam:

    You put LOL at the end of your posting. It is no laughing matter, I assure you.

    If Kevin R genuinely is monumentally uninterested in my views or yours it is only because we are too dumb to see what the scientific world has been subtly telling us for the last 65 years, which is that Kevin and his gang have been right all along and that they (i.e. the scientific community and the military) have confirmed this but have to inform the public using all sorts of hints, double-speak and carefully disguised 'pronouncements' from time to time.

    But the message has been clear to most of the public - except you and me. Oh dear!

    By Blogger cda, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • CDA
    The fiendishly diabolical plot to subtly inform the public that aliens are among us by secret hints and inferences in the media reminds me of my long ago experiences with more than one schizophrenic's insistence that there were hidden cameras in the washrooms or that there were secret hidden codes in Life Magazine. One sort of delusional belief system is sanctioned, whereas others are socially taboo although the two are equally a case of hoodoo semiotics, lost in translation, an effect looking for a cause without corroborating evidence.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • Bruce: "Another aspect of the Roswell mythos that Don mentioned, is shared by many a cited case of singular or multiple anomalous events is that they are exclusively post editorial while being witness based and not prone to real time examination. Roswell is a case of compounding facts in search of a case."

    Just a note on the "witness based":

    I don't think the Roswell investigators anticipated there would be so many "witnesses". I can't blame them following the trail. More and more "witnesses" turned up. Then more.

    To skeptics I am sure it seemed like Roswell was a clown car.

    What the investigators did not comprehend, if they didn't expect the witness turnout, was that Brazel had talked about his find for one to three weeks, and because children were involved from the beginning, they were another vector of propagation. Reporters from both radio stations said they talked with Brazel. Wilcox wasn't the first sheriff he talked to, either, according to the Morning Dispatch. Then, there was the Weather Bureau, and wherever else Brazel had made inquiries. A short time after noon on the 8th, Walsh broadcast a news bulletin, as did Frank Joyce, on the story they'd gotten from Haut. These bulletins, heard in Roswell town, were also heard at the RAAF.

    Basically, the "witness" pool of those who might recall a saucer story from that summer in Chaves and Lincoln counties was around 40,000 people.

    I don't know of any criteria investigators have established for culling the herd of witness accounts, except independent corroboration. Unfortunately, "independent" is difficult to prove in such an environment, especially if the informational environment is not recognized.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • Most of these 'witnesses' were not genuine witnesses. If they were, then the whole idea of secrecy would crash to earth like the disc itself.

    They were part of a nebulous grapevine that grew with time, probably very slowly in the early days but very rapidly post-1978, and even more so post-1991 when the first Randle-Schmitt book appeared. The desire for publicity helped.

    More and more got sucked into the morass, then their sons and daughters did, and later even THEIR sons and daughters. Nurses got sucked in, doctors, remote relatives and friends, firemen, police chiefs and their families, radio guys, pressmen, military wives, kids and so on, ad infinitum. Deathbed 'confessions' added to the morass.

    Yet this was (and still is) a top secret affair, wasn't it?

    And you can always retrace things, find a motive or reason for how so-and-so acted at the time. It all fits into the great picture. If General Vandenberg had an hour missing from his log, then WOW, Roswell explains it!

    Was not a similar methodology adopted to prove the CIA or some other agencies were after all, responsible for JFK's murder? The details escape me now, but the actions of literally hundreds of people fall into place if (so we have been told) JFK was murdered as a result of a big conspiracy.

    But if so many were indeed involved, how come it stayed secret at all?

    By Blogger cda, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • One more monkey in the works.. being played by those whom you do not know are also players who may have the same interest steered in other directions.
    There certainly were alleged "witnesses" whose personal accounts were examples cross contamination of one another either or by the lack of an arms length culling of their ranks on the basis of (2)their vested interest in steering the investigation or (3)one filling in the blanks of another, or (4) wanting to insert themselves to gain attention in an small town in the middle of nowhere.

    The temptation of a shared narrative is there, whether it reflects what happened or not.

    This was also true of the great airship flap wherein small towns also in the middle of nowhere used fraudulent newspaper accounts to gain attention to be "known for something" Sound familiar?
    I recall one U.S airship incident that was nearly word for word, event from event, borrowed from a UK account.

    That there is now a Roswell Festival, a Roswell Museum as an effect of becoming "known" regardless of the veracity of their claim, speaks volumes in regard to a profitable venture in making unverifiable myths, a play on curiosity like the frozen ape man in the sideshow.

    Self inflation by promotion is as American as PT Barnum.

    Also..that until outsiders came into the community ( like many an anthropologist will tell us) everything was as dead as a door nail.

    Only when outsiders arrive looking for X or Y do the natives give collaborating witness testimony about X or Y, sly playing on the party who has a strong predisposition for wanting to hear that X or Y is true. Keeps them wanting more of course.
    The hypnotist becomes hypnotized by transference and begins to write an account only to realize much later he bamboozled himself with assistance from the local color.

    The so called naive rubes of isolated communities have had( many a time) the last laugh using a pre-Youtube original creation to gain a vested interest.

    The giant lizard man of the Carolinas has spawned an a town identity and draws Fortean aficionados.

    This trend has multiplied. The latest contaminate seems to be everyone claiming their hotel or town is haunted by apes, saucers or ghosts which the media promotes no less on the Travel Channel.

    Same game with different markers.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • As usual, my fellow quidnuncs, you have strayed from the posting and the import of it; i.e., that Roswell is a "sunk-cost" affair.

    Those ensnared by it, with a heavy investment of time and effort cannot, for various reasons, give up on Roswell.

    That includes we here and the fanatics who are discussing it at Kevin's blog.

    We all are emotional and intellectual reprobates.

    I've dug out my raft of books on Roswell, and they are a conglomeration of nonsense and fact, none of which amounts to anything worthwhile, in real, practical terms.

    If Roswell was the locale of a real ET catastrophe, that event has passed us by.

    If it is a confluence of myth and hearsay -- a meme -- it's grist for sociologists, not "ufologists."

    It's a "sunk-cost" incident.

    Try to stick with the topic please; I'm not as convivial as Kevin is at his blog when visitors get loopy.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • Mr. Sunk Costs has a message:

    "Look, I'm just an analogy. Pan off me."

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • Cute, Don, cute...

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • "I get the feeling that the Brazel debris is one thing and the flying disk another.

    They are intertwined somehow but there are two incidents (or more)."

    I'm right behind you on this one, Bro. It's faulty logic to assume that because events take place concurrently in proximity to each other they are necessarily related or part of a cause and effect chain.

    By Blogger purrlgurrl, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • PG....

    I went though the Roswell books here today, and I'm convinced that there were two (or more) confluent events in the July 1947 Roswell time-frame.

    I'll present my "thesis" upcoming.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, January 22, 2013  

  • RR:

    Your 'discovery' is old news, very old. Stanton Friedman established decades ago that there were two saucer crashes that day - one at Roswell (involving several locations), and a second one on the Plains of San Augustin. It is all documented in his epoch-making, scientifically endorsed and highly acclaimed book CRASH AT CORONA. What more do you need?

    By Blogger cda, at Wednesday, January 23, 2013  

  • Ha! You are correct, as usual, Christopher.

    Mr. Friedman suggested two crashes.

    The reality is otherwise I think.

    There was an accident of some kind, near Corona during the Thunderstorm that Brazel and others heard, and a subsequent event north of Roswell.

    Brazel's debris involved the Corona incident, and had nothing to do with a flying disc.

    The Roswell event was odd, and not necessarily related to the Corona accident but fused with it because of the 1978 (and after) compilation of erroneous witness reports and biased conclusions from Friedman et al.

    (Your humorous suggestion that Aztec was an ET recovery attempt offered me a hint to look at the Roswell time-line -- not Kevin Randle's time-line, and accounts of the events, at the time, without the clutter of the ET fanatics.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, January 23, 2013  

  • I was also ruminating on a timeline and I was also thinking that it's so unfortunate for any possibility that the alleged event slept for a significant amount of time inasmuch as it would be interesting to correlate witness time and dates to others who could possibly attest to their whereabouts. Of course, even a day or so fogs a accurate recall. This is another example of both an immediate forensic investigation and the sunk cost reference. When I was actively blogging , a couple of years ago I used an analogous phrase, terming Roswell, a heat sink. This impossible arbiter of accuracy in a timeline is another example of shoveling sand into the tide. A rough estimate won't do for evidence. It is like math or physics you cannot redo or accurately reconstruct what was done sixty five years ago. The odds are astronomically against anything other than reinterpreting the history that already exists and the odds are what does exist is largely innuendo or inference. Sunk cost, indeed.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Wednesday, January 23, 2013  

  • Bruce:

    There is a "simple" (uncomplicated) time-line and there is the minute, hard-to-verify time-line. (See Kevin Randle's attempt, which merely exacerbates the sunk-cost scenario and creates a plenitude of possibilities for the Roswell fanatics to comment upon, which they are doing.)

    The simple time-line indicates that a couple of things happened within days of each other, and have come to be amalgamated within the Roswell mythology -- the meme.

    One can delineate the activity, without much trouble, so long as the fanatics are kept out of the discussion.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, January 23, 2013  

  • As far as simplicity I know you would agree that the devil is in the details. I was just reading some recently declassified military tactical military experiments related to WW2 and some could be characterized as throwing everything to the wall to see what stuck, in a time of war.

    The odd, the unusual the arcane. This certainly fits the characterization of what was allegedly found.

    Another aspect of the sunk cost overlay is what has not been declassified as I mentioned in another comment as the backlog and procedures for doing so are enormous. Very few that I am aware of knows whats entailed but are first to cry conspiracy.

    The only plausible end to this game that I suspect may still be lurking in the shadows is exactly what is unavailable, not what is available.

    There is no way for either the military or UFO buffs to pry it lose to examine it if it's still buried by federal law. Even hinting at it would be a no-no for federal officials by statute.

    To me, is anything, it could have easily been a one off trial or series of trials that was a failure judging by a crash or multiple crashes, failures.

    And so the sunk cost or heat sink of Roswell and it's attendant mystique may just as easily be analogous to a bone buried in federal military archives remaining classified, yet to be examined due to what we already know, an enormous backlog in regard to declassification processes.

    There is some irony in this possibility that the whole shebang might end up being a sort of bureaucratic entanglement of paperwork that some are shooting at from the hip, making a conspiracy of this without knowing how "secrets" are classified, archived processed and then released.

    Case in point, look up how long the plans for the invasion of Japan were kept secret decades after they became outdated and moot. It took quite an effort to dislodge them but it was an easier task because their existence was already safely assumed.

    Could this be at the root of a sunk cost scenario? I think it's more likely we will all be very dead by the time that number is called.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Wednesday, January 23, 2013  

  • If one, Bruce, wants to know exactly what was discovered or what was involved in New Mexico in July 1947, yes, the details are important.

    But to find out if there were concomitant events doesn't require the minutiae that attracts the Roswell fanatics.

    ]One has to discover the forest first. The trees can be examined later.

    Let's not open the door to those who need to show how much Roswell detritus they've picked up over the years.

    Nick Redfern gets irate with the armchair investigators, me among them.

    One has to go to places where there might be some evidence to bolster the views they present.

    In my scenario, that isn't really necessary as the (non-Randle) time-line gives us hints that more than one happened near Roswell during that hot July period.

    If the premise holds up, the fanatics and/or the real UFO researchers can pursue the details.

    Otherwise, the suck-cost effect remains intact.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, January 23, 2013  

  • I still don't see "sunk costs" as a good analogy -- keeping with the analogy, I don't see any decision by the named (David, Kevin) that demonstrates it. Perhaps you are predicting such a thing by the dream team.

    What I do see is the time they spend online refuting the Roswell skeptics. I think by now it is simply sport for the 'named'. The Roswell skeptics are a better example of 'sunk costs'. As well, they are reactive rather than proactive and depend on the Roswell advocates to feed them their lines.

    The error I see advocates make is the same one commonly seen in ufology and made by near every advocate and all the skeptics. Their thesis is their conclusion. They look for evidence for the already conceived conclusion. This isn't a fatal error, it just creates a lot of unnecessary work.

    It shouldn't take a quarter century to produce a coherent account of 'Roswell', people.

    The forest/trees analogy. In order to see the forest you have to get up high enough. That requires cutting down some trees and building a tower.

    I look at the lumber used to build the tower.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Don:

    You and the Kevin commenters are at the edge of providing discourse that no one cares about.

    The minutiae is irrelevant.

    The skeptics and ET advocates, the real skeptics and the real ET advocates, want to get to the nub of the incident.

    You fellows are playing at the fringes.

    You guys are avoiding the crime scene by concentrating on happenings that are tangentially connected to it.

    The forest is there, and the trees, but you guys are absorbed by the fungi on the floor of the forest.

    It may be interesting, to you (mostly) but not to those who want to get at the core matter of the Roswell event(s).

    I (and others) are not able to make it clear that none of us care what you guys are putting on Kevin's blog.....it's effluvia.

    I'm getting chastised for even being critical of the nonsense.

    There is a list of UFO dopes circulating.

    You might want to search it out.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Rich "You and the Kevin commenters are at the edge of providing discourse that no one cares about."

    Oh sure you do! Look how often the subject of your articles are about that discourse. You certainly appear irritated, even angry about it. There's an emotional investment in that. You've got your own dreamteamer in Tony, and you've got a small chorus of 'bored teenagers' to second you -- and, of course, the orphaned skeptics.

    I'm looking forward to your 'forest' article.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • You mistake, Don, my interest in the core Roswell incident(s) for an interest in what goes on at Kevin's blog.

    Some of us, Redfern too I think, are interested in what Kevin and his Dream Team have to say, but along come you fringers and we all have to wade through the swill to see if there is something new or worthwhile to behold.

    I fault Kevin for letting you guys take control of the debate and what he initially posts.

    He think that a "democratic debate" is good. It isn't.

    Too many voices with nothing to really impart controls the discussion.

    Even CDA want to know what happened at Roswell, but he, too, gets caught up in the carnival of silly that Kevin's postings bring forth.

    I'd ask Kevin to control his blog, be an editor, or a fascist if necessary.

    But he wouldn't listen.

    He likes, as I keep writing, quantity over quality.

    You have the possible sense to step back and see how stupid the debate has become: Rudiak raving, CDA baiting him, and Gilles compounding the silly with fractured English.

    You want answers to your specific areas of interest, which have little or nothing to do with Roswell per se.

    The rest of us want to know if a flying disc was found, and if it was alien in nature or not.

    That's about it...

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Rich: "The rest of us want to know if a flying disc was found, and if it was alien in nature or not."

    And you look for the evidence of it, and only it? Everything else seems "minutiae" or irrelevant? That's the mistake the Roswell advocates made and the result is 25 years of drudgery.

    To reach the king, one must first get through the pawns. It helps to be able to distinguish black from white, too.

    I do wish you the best on this.


    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • I have to disagree with you Don...

    Getting to the core of the matter doesn't require the sidetracks you fellows are trudging through.

    It's like examining the nails on Jesus' cross to determine if he rose from the dead or not.

    The Dream Team members are pursuing matters that are germane.

    But one wouldn't know that by the colloquies at Kevin's blog.

    He's besmirching his team's ultimate conclusion(s) by the premature nonsense he's allowing to be ballyhooed at his blog.

    Rudiak is the worst offender, rehashing his theses again and again.

    That CDA and Lance Moody encourage him is just mischief making.

    You haven't a care about the Roswell incident....the core of it.

    Your interest lies in the media and social machinations endemic to the event(s).

    The people on board at Kevin's blog don't get that.

    They think you're one of them: a Roswell aficionado. You aren't.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • I pointed out to Kevin where he said that I "parrot nonsense" (because I have little or no knowledge of USAF procedures) that he and his gang parrot far greater nonsense.

    There is little need for me to know what USAF procedures and protocols were in 1947 or in 2013, (although Kevin is in a far stronger position on this score than anyone else, having served in the AF for many years).

    Is not the crux of the whole Roswell affair one simple question, which I keep posing:

    Is it credible that the US government, or any other government, recovered an alien craft plus the bodies, in the desert 65 years ago and is STILL keeping it under wraps from the scientific world and the public for all this time?

    Overall, there is no other way of looking at this. If anyone insists the answer to the above is 'yes' then it is incumbent on them to produce the hard evidence, including at least a fraction of the mountain of documentation that undoubtedly exists on it.

    Kevin cannot or will not do so. Rudiak likewise. Tony Bragalia likewise, Stan Friedman likewise, etc, etc.

    All they ever do (and ever will do) is to pretend that it is all there but still kept top secret. That is their ONLY WAY OUT of the dilemma they are in.

    We skeptics need not produce any such negative documentation, although there is enough of it already, to refute their thesis. The onus is on THEM.

    How should we, i.e. you, me and others, proceed? Science is not interested. Do you blame them?

    The ET advocates have painted themselves into a corner that they cannot get out of. They are simply stuck, forever, and they know it in their hearts. Nobody, including Kevin, expects the 'dream team' to turn up any hard evidence for ETs visiting our planet in recent times, meaning the last 100 years. They are searching for a three-legged biped.

    Really, I should simply shut up, stay shut up, and let the case wither on the vine. This is precisely the attitude of science in general.

    With Roswell, you can only argue objectively and anti-ET up to a point. After that it boils down to plain common sense. Kevin and Co. are sadly lacking in this.

    I imagine Bruce would agree, but he tends to express his arguments using a different vocabulary.

    Enough said!

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Christopher...

    You guys (Lance, Gilles, and Don somewhat) intimidate Kevin, Rudiak, and the ET believers.

    But going at the minutiae of the Roswell story isn't helpful.

    The Dream Team has to find documentation, and I think it is somewhere....not that an alien ship crashed by documentation that lays out what exactly happened over that July period...and accident? A mistaken identification of balloon debris? A screw up by Haut? Et cetera.

    Witness testimony is useless at this stage of the story.

    What happened with the teletype is also.

    Brazel's part of the story is a wash....not even interesting.

    Blanchard's leave is not worthy of the time spent on it.

    What is needed is what happened after the event, if there was one, and after the Ramey dismissal.

    There is documentation about that, somewhere.

    Tony Bragalia knows that, as does the Dream Team.

    For Kevin to be fooling around with the Rudiak rehash, which you, Lance, and Gilles provoke, is laughable if it wasn't so stupid.

    A few things happened, at the same time, near Roswell -- not two disk crashes either -- but something odd.

    Brazel's part of it messes up the story of what one of those things was.....the Mogul balloon loss perhaps.

    But something else happened, and is lost in the shuffle, that loss exacerbated by the Friedman conjectures, the Rudiak nonsense, and Kevin's allowing anyone and everyone to weigh in.

    As I told Don, he isn't interested in Roswell one bit and keeps telling everyone that, but his search for media and social blunders muddy the waters even more when he inserts them in the Kevin discussion.

    You, I think, want to know what exactly happened, but the songs and dances of the UFO researchers, Kevin among them, is maddening in their obfuscation and biased renderings.

    Kevin's Dream Team is working to find the final Roswell answer but one wouldn't know that from the inserts at his blog.

    RR



    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Rich: "They think you're one of them: a Roswell aficionado. You aren't."

    That is true. I get along better with the advocates than the skeptics because I agree with them something out of the ordinary was going on. We agree on what some of the signs of that are.

    It is possible to discuss the matter without acrimony, rare as it is -- except, of course, about ET. Then things get difficult.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • And, Rich, I agree with much of what you posted just above mine.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • I understand your position, Don...

    And it is sensible within the context of your interest(s).

    But you're dealing with hooples, and they have no idea what you're getting at, often not responding because their interest is firming up their biases.

    Christopher is frustrated by Rudiak and Kevin not getting his rational skeptical queries.

    But that only is waving a red cape in front of a bull.

    Kevin and especially Rudiak are the sunk-cost guys.

    They've invested so much in the Roswell thing that they can't can't abandon it now, for the reasons cited in my post above, from The New Yorker piece.

    But Kevin and his Team are working to make Kevin's investment worthwhile finally.

    Redfern thinks that won't happen but Bragalia assures me that the Team has found some worthwhile interesting new things, and I believe him.

    This make me think that we have a few things going on near Roswell in July 1947....something I've maintained for a long time and can be seen at early posts here and at our RRRGroup blog and other UFO blogs.

    Again, the Brazel scenario is tangential.

    He's only involved because he inserted himself, inadvertently, in something more significant than his finding of balloon or odd debris.

    The real event took place north of Roswell not northwest near Corona.

    What that event was intrigues.

    Was it an alien disk crash? We don't know for sure.

    CDA thinks that the government wouldn't keep such an event secret for all these years, but it's a possibility they could have and still maintain the secret....a possibility.

    But documentation, official or otherwise is someplace, I'm convinced.

    Again, there's always a keeper of the keys....always.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • And thanks Don...

    We are two guys looking for different truths, but truths after all.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Rich: "Again, there's always a keeper of the keys....always."

    And nothing disappears without a trace.

    "This make me think that we have a few things going on near Roswell in July 1947....something I've maintained for a long time and can be seen at early posts here and at our RRRGroup blog and other UFO blogs."

    There were UFO things going on in the region besides the Brazel news story, before and after.

    "Again, the Brazel scenario is tangential."

    The story in the press release may not be true. Brazel could still be central, only in a different scenario. We have good evidence only for the last sentence because Bond Johnson took pictures...that's probably the injection point of the Bloecher "virus". Everything before the last sentence is (to quote myself) "form without substance".

    The press release 'certifies' the cooperation between the military and the civilian spheres. Pro forma.

    I'm not convinced there was a second site, and it is one reason I don't follow the latest developments, if there are any. The goal posts shifted one too many times for my tastes.

    What is the first site location based on? What some folk said? What is the second site location based on? What some folk said?

    There were forty thousand potential witnesses in the region. Because people grow old and die, one cannot leave the witnesses to last. Now that they're dead, I haven't seen any criteria for analyzing the data set. Kevin has done something like that with abduction stories, I recall.

    For those of us who aren't "Roswell aficionados", the piling up of witnesses has a negative impact. We reach threshold exhaustion. Piling up anything is at best bad information design.


    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Don:

    Brazel is a side-bar.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Rich:

    Yes, I am indeed very interested in anything and everything the Dream team uncovers.

    But, I suspect that what will be uncovered will be more fascinating info and intriguing witness testimony, but not a smoking gun.

    There are a couple of possibilities: all the people I interviewed for my Body Snatchers book said all the files had been destroyed, since the op was somewhat not exactly legal, and because no worthwhile medical results were achieved from the high-altitude experiments, as they resulted in failure.

    So, in the sense of it being a classified domestic op, it's very possible that beyond the memories of old people, there really is nothing left.

    On the other hand, if ET really did crash, the overwhelming lack of the literal proof and ANY documentation of deep significance in terms of offering proof of ET visitation must be buried so incredibly deeply that it simply cannot be accessed (literally).

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Oh I agree, Nick...

    Any documentation is secreted away, surely.....except for the piece or two that a "Liebowitz" held back or squirreled away, outside the catacombs of officialdom.

    I think Anthony agrees with me about that.

    All it takes is one piece of bona fide documentation or paper.

    Even an authentic memoir or diary entry by a validated or vetted first-hand witness.

    There is always so much paper work, even in a "secret" or "top secret" enterprise, that something has to be extant.

    Getting hands on it, however, is daunting, as you note.

    But not impossible.

    Whether the documentation verifies an ET aspect of the 1947 events is iffy, but not impossible either.

    But I surmise it could be something not unlike your Body Snatchers in the Desert.

    The Dream Team works apace and has come up with some fabulous stuff, as I have been told -- without a whiff of what that stuff may be, but from a trusted source.

    I bet you've gotten a few inklings also,

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2013  

  • Are you taunting us with what we might expect the dream team to discover?

    They may well discover a few mildly interesting things, like what 'could' have happened or what 'might' have happened at Roswell. But we have had enough of such conjectures already.

    And let's face it, unless it is cast iron evidence/proof of ET, nobody is going to be that interested, are they?

    What were the GAO involved in - the finding of documentation of ANY kind, not just relating to ET. And what did they turn up? Exactly zilch, over & above what was already in the public domain. Yet you still hope and believe they missed something, or even missed a lot. Maybe Nick Redfern hopes the same.

    Why is the group known as the Dream Team anyway? Any ideas?

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Rich:
    What could be better than a fractured English to apprehend a fractured wreckage about affair? ^^

    For the minutia, and out the debat, I like to see the ETH-proponents arguments to believe of the weird thing, as an UFO crashed in New Mexico in 1947 and USAF is hidden it for decades now.
    The confirmation bias to take any detail - ie this one eated an apple this 8th July 1947 afternoon despite he liked normaly orange ==> that's strange, therefore Roswell linked - is fascinating.

    And as Christopher probably, I ask me often to shut up in blogs, and to focalize on other UFO affairs concerning this hobby, because "it feeds the chimera" some investigators are pursuiting.

    Regards,

    Gilles

    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Christopher:

    I think Kevin's Dream Team is not idle, and finding new, interesting things about the Roswell event.

    His blog should be dealing with other UFO cases, so as not to confuse his Team's eventual Roswell-intrigued audience, but he can't help himself.

    He likes to generate comments and knows, as do I, that a Roswell theme will bring forth lots of comments -- inane comments usually but he likes quantity for some reason.

    The GAO search for Roswell documents took place in the obvious nooks and crannies of government.

    The GAO could not and did not broach the "private sector" such as Battelle and Sandia.

    There are dozens of facilities that could very likely hold remnants of the Roswell imbroglio.

    And those places would not be forced to or inclined to shred their documents about Roswell.

    Also, I imagine (and have been told by reliable sources) that some private, validated documents and photos exist and have been seen by persons with credibility and research cachet.

    That doesn't mean, as I see it, that an ET presence is indicated but I can't rule that out either.

    My point is that the nature of bureaucracy (military and otherwise) is to hoard their documentations of activity.

    Even told to dump or eliminate secret and top secret materials, someone always refuses to do so, for various reasons.

    Whatever happened near Roswell in 1947, there are, I'm almost certain, a cache of materials still extant.

    Getting one's hands on that material is daunting, surely but not impossible, luck and diligence being important ingredients in a find of such stuff.

    Dream Team? Why not? It's a lousy epithet or sobriquet of course, but Kevin Randle isn't known for being dynamically creative.

    If he were, he'd delete all the Rudiak posts and inane comments by others at his blog and replace them with truly interesting UFO accounts.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Gilles,

    Your "fractured English" is not half as bad as my fractured French, but it confuses the soft-headed readers of Kevin's blog....Rudiak in particular.

    Yes, Roswell is chimeric in nature, a myth overall.

    But at the core is something that spurred the myth, something that antedates Stan Friedman's and other researchers' add-ons after 1978.

    That initial myth-premise may not be ET but it is something more than just a lot of messy miscalculations by Roswellians and the local Army contingent.

    The Randle blog keeps those sloppy 1947 misdeeds alive and viable, Rudiak the master of Roswell zombie materials.

    One can only hope that the sunk-cost scenario is noted and some of the Randle habitues leave the Roswell minutiae alone for awhile.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Don is the guy trying to get at the root of it all. He concentrates on the press release. Why on earth WAS this ever countenanced and put out at all?

    We may assume that everyone, military or civilian, who handled the junk that day or days had a good idea what it was. There were doubts of course - it was serious cold war time and Russia (so it was feared) may have had some secret weapon to frighten the US with; or maybe the US itself had something. But it seems very obvious to me that Marcel & Co knew, with say 80-90% certainty, what the junk was.

    I suppose there was always that bit of uncertainty and fear that hung about.

    But this still leaves us with the release itself. Was it really necessary, and if so, why?

    Don is right - what on earth was going on? My own guess, as I have said before, is that it was indeed mainly a publicity stunt: "look folks we have captured a flying disc at last". But of course the release carefully omits that the stuff had been identified with reasonable certainty. It created a flurry of interest - which was its intention. And naturally NOBODY at the time ever imagined the ET furore it would begin to cause 32 years later, a furore which continues to this day.

    Gilles:

    Oh yes! If Gen Vandenberg had eaten an apple instead of an orange for lunch on July 8, or Blanchard had extended his lunch break for one hour this would have been due to an 'emergency' arising out of the Roswell crash. Simple logic, isn't it?

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Okay, Christopher...

    You know I luv ya, but let's not get the Roswell clan all hopped up here.

    Kevin's blog is the bar where the Roswell drunks congregate, as you know, and are inclined to indulge, yourself.

    Let his venue be the place where the Roswell "nonsense" is put on public view.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Chris "Dream Team" is Americanese for the best possible. Annual baseball All Star teams are dream teams. Picking players you believe were the best ever at their position would be naming a dream team. I assume when Kevin first used the term, he was alluding to that.


    Rich, I don't understand why you would care in the slightest that occasionally Kevin posts an article about Roswell, or that anyone comments. It seems making a mountain out of a molehill.

    You may not like David, but your characterization of him is absurd.
    Thanks to recent posts by David, we now know the AEC was informed about Roswell on the 8th...so, maybe we should look to the AEC. That is a very tough research task. I know of no other evidence from 1947 that implicates another agency, besides the army, in the Roswell story .

    However, no plan is perfect (add to
    'key keeper',and 'nothing disappearing'), as the Roswell press release proves. To get to the AEC one will have to go through lots of minutiae and tangents. Some things will not give to main force. AEC is one. CIC is another.

    Take away the dream teams' witnesses and what evidence is there for a second site? For that matter, what evidence is there for a first site? All we can know from 47 about the "first site" is that it was on the Foster Ranch.

    Why look for a second site? Because there were no dead aliens or spaceship in the 47 stories, and the only witness living in 1978 was Marcel Sr, who had nothing to say about such things.

    But you have these stories from folk in Roswell town and at the RAAF about such things, thus logically, there must be a second site, and near enough to town that folk could drive out to it easily.

    "I saw dead aliens" someone may say. It is useless information without knowing what the questions were and the context of the exchange. The investigators know that, not me. Ok, fine, but I have to set it aside until the transcript is available. I'm not disputing their conclusion, just that there is nothing at all I can do regarding it. Can't believe it. Can't not believe it.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Don:

    I like Kevin Randle....a lot.

    But when he allows the foolishness evidenced in his comment section, it offends me intellectually.

    There are sites where such inanities are rampant; Above Top Secret for example, used by the eminent Isaac Koi who is tops with me also.

    I go to Kevin or Koi for enlightenment, not rabble trash.

    Rudiak is a kind of fanatic Sherlock Holmes.

    He's often got the goods but his rapacity for presentation is irksome, and he's windy.

    The Foster Ranch and Brazel are unimportant.

    They are side-bars to what really happened near Roswell, at the site of an odd occurrence.

    The press release, as CDA has it, and you also (sometimes), is the Holmesian clue.

    You fellows have lost your way, anxious to prove points or, as I keep saying, showing off...."I know this, I know that" and "I have insights that the rest of you don't have."

    Dead alien testimony is not as far out as you and CDA imagine.

    (The Dream Team may provide something to allow my statement.)

    More to come.....(as usual) and may Nick Redfern and Paul Kimball forgive me for keeping this going.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Rich, post this up if you want. I promise its the last time I'll post on it on Iconoclasts.

    CDA: "Don is the guy trying to get at the root of it all. He concentrates on the press release. Why on earth WAS this ever countenanced and put out at all?"

    The pr gives up three reasons. One is to 'certify' the army was cooperating with civilians (including the rancher); they were requested to join the investigation. This is the clearest fingerprint of army intelligence and especially a fingerprint of the CIC. two, is to respond to (local) "rumors" about a flying disk.

    "Don is right - what on earth was going on? My own guess, as I have said before, is that it was indeed mainly a publicity stunt"

    And you are right, it was for a publicity stunt. Ramey's publicity at Ft Worth. The big reveal could not happen without the press release, because nobody would know what Ramey was going on about otherwise. This is obscured by the Bloecher Effect.

    So, the press release reveals the involvement of the CIC, the existence of local rumors, and is the necessary setup for the rawin photo op in Ft Worth.

    The press release, and the content of the press release are part of the cover-up of whatever they were covering up. It is why I don't simply assume the Tinker to Evers to Chance (baseball, again) of the pr is true ("the Brazel Scenario"). I'm fascinated the Roswell Daily Record dropped Evers.

    Also, it is possible the CIC gave in to their weakness: to be too, too, clever.

    At the very least, and maybe the skeptics want to go here, at the height of the 47 Wave, they wanted to prevent the press (and foreign press or agents of foreign states) from wandering about atomic installations asking questions of the locals. They did achieve directing attention to Ft Worth and away from sensitive places like the RAAF or the string of installations along the routes of Carrizozo and Corona.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • RR:

    Excuse my digression, but...

    You wrote to Gilles: "Your 'fractured English' is not half as bad as my fractured French".

    This phrase 'not half as bad' struck me forcibly. It is a phrase we in the UK (or rather some of us in the UK) use quite a bit. I always avoid it. Also, I assumed you Americans never used this phrase. Do you?

    I doubt the French understand it either. But has it spread throughout the English-speaking world now?

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • It's my English roots -- Reynolds -- that causes me to use it.

    A tribute also to an old friend there, Alistair McCallum.

    It's arcane slang, as you know, and I am inebriated by such slang.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • To be generous, Don ironically claims: "There were UFO things going on in the region besides the Brazel news story, before and after."

    Then he claims, "They" did this... "They" did that... Doing his half-baked make-it-up, completely subjective, sixty-five years after-the-fact rationalizations of events and behaviours--bordering on conspiracy mongering--within the "UFO" delusion.

    And it's all complete baloney, Don! Nothing the least bit "UFO" was going on in the region, the state of NM, Texas, or anywhere else! And nobody did anything! It wasn't a PR stunt, it was merely a moment of "flying saucer" hysteria affecting otherwise rational human beings. Ranchers, newspapermen or military people, it doesn't matter one bit, they were all just caught up in a typical small-group scare.

    Within the context of 1947 "flying saucer" hysteria, an ordinary man formed the false idea that some seemingly strange balloon-train debris might be a crashed "flying saucer" because even he--in remote southeastern New Mexico--had been subjected to the recent "flying saucer" hysteria and delusion." He then infected, transferred that fantastic false belief to the imaginations of others; and then they, for their own self-serving reasons, ran with the story, the false belief--no matter how obviously false it was, but not one being an expert--that there was, or at least could be, something extraordinary about the mundane balloon-train debris. That is, until more rational and more knowledgeable heads prevailed and the completely human, typical small-group scare had run its course and was over.

    It was all forgotten until some junky-book-writing ufoolergists recalled this minor incident--a mere headline and some photos that involved the military, a nearby nuclear-weapons base--and conflated it with secret weapons development and testing in New Mexico, the magical year of initial "flying saucer" hysteria, and so created their very own version--their inspired recreation, a Shaver-and-Keyhoe mashup--of the "flying saucer" cosmic-conspiracy myth and collective delusion.

    Knowing that a half-century of newspaper, magazine, saloon and liar's club tall tales of "UFO" crashes, bodies, parts and secret writing existed prior to 1947, no rational person could consider any part of this Roswell nonsense--the impossible conspiracy, or as any sort black ops and coverup--seriously for even a moment.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Zoam: "And it's all complete baloney, Don!"

    Look, you geezer skeptics are finished on Roswell. I've stuck a bazooka up your arse and pulled the trigger. Get used to it.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • "Why is the group known as the Dream Team anyway? Any ideas?"

    Because author KDR is dreaming of selling a few more books. And the other "team" members are dreaming that someone might someday take them seriously--even if it's only "seriously" enough to get them on C2C, that pit of paranormalist diarrhea.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • The Dream Team sobriquet is a kind of entitlement, Zoam.

    It was an unfortunate choice but really is harmless.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Speaking of incoherent dreaming, Don writes:

    "Look, you geezer skeptics are finished on Roswell. I've stuck a bazooka up your arse and pulled the trigger. Get used to it."

    As usual, I have little or no idea what the Don is on about. I only know when he makes statements that are contrary to the known historical facts of the matter.

    So what "bazooka," Don? Can you communicate to us in plain English? I can hardly fathom any point in your posts, much less the triumph you've imagined.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Zoam:

    You are a skeptic like me but more outspoken and virulent. But maybe you can answer my recent question: What do YOU think was the real purpose of that Roswell press release? Was it for publicity, was it carelessness on someone's part or was it genuine bewilderment at the nature of the debris found?

    Was it necessary at all?

    I agree entirely with your phrase "junky book-writing ufoolerogists", as applied to Berlitz/Moore/Friedman.

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Tell you what, Zoam. You demonstrate you are not a common household skeptical fanboy who posts nothing but flaming trolls and that you actually know at least a 100th of what other skeptics like CDA, Lance, Giles, and Tim know about the matter, and maybe I'll respond differently to you.

    As it is, don't expect me to treat you as anything but a farcical ass who posts nothing but antique boilerplate.

    You are entertainment.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Okay, fellows. you've drifted into a swamp of invective and rant.

    This is about UFOs, not life and death or moral imperatives.

    It's about an ephemeral phenomenon and one story within the context of that phenomenon: Roswell.

    It's not worth getting so worked up about.

    A patina of irk is okay, but all out vicious anger seems out of place and a little nutty.

    You guys are supposed to reel in my assiness, not eviscerate one another.

    Let's calm down...

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, January 25, 2013  

  • Rich, I am not angry. I am delighted. Zoam demonstrates what happens when you cannot recover from the Bloecher Effect:

    "it was merely a moment of "flying saucer" hysteria affecting otherwise rational human beings. Ranchers, newspapermen or military people, it doesn't matter one bit, they were all just caught up in a typical small-group scare."

    You see, everyone was "elated"...well only those in a small town. It must stop at the "small town" boundary wherever it may be drawn. And wherever it is drawn, it will be drawn so as to exclude General Ramey or his superiors. Take that for granted.

    I rest my case.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • One thing is clear: you all love the sound of your own voices every bit as much as those you criticize :P

    By Blogger vimanaboy, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • My theory. The odds of the event being a publicity stunt or an error are extremely thin and only arise when you remove the possibility of an opportunity that presented itself to intelligence to plant a false flag to ferret out specific individuals from what they already knew ( which is well documented) that their own security had long ago been severely compromised especially in atomic development in terms of weaponry. The linkage between a AF base dedicated to this weaponry as well as the "coincidental" so-called "event" is more than noteworthy. I have mentioned James Angleton the only sanctioned counterintelligence CIA chief who was given his own black box within the CIA itself and a dedicated team to do what they did in the shadows. I can cite many example of this strategy being used, over and over.
    If this counterintelligence operation does not require burying the bone I do not know what would. All of the investigators have fallen for the same ruse the Soviet fell for decades ago.
    This material is certainly still classified and the naivety that a GAO search would find it or peruse it is laughable. If you are looking for a forest step back from the trees and see the context. Seeded viral implants meant to seed misinformation using dupes and shills are as old as kingdoms themselves.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • Examples of the same trick;
    1. The non existent army led by Patton to a non existent plan for landing.
    2. Rubber and cardboard planes and tanks as non existent weaponry.
    3. The non existent ace up the sleeve via the non existent "Starwars. weaponry.
    4. The non existent nuclear arms of Saddam Hussein IE weapons of mass destruction. A ruse that fomented a ruse.
    5. The admitted planting of non existent UFO memes by the CIA to mask X craft.
    6. The non existent enemy casualties used to misinform and mislead Johnson by military brass. Some quick work with a slide ruler in one meeting showed the enemy had been completely dispatched several times over.
    There's more..but needless to say, it's a well used hat trick.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • In the previous discussion, I described the Bloecher Effect. There is an idea used in science fiction called "lethal text", which is a text, which when read, destroys the mind of the reader. Thus no one knows what the lethal text says. Monty Python used the concept for the "killing joke" skit.

    I'll guess everyone has seen a tv show or movie in which the hero defeats the out of control robot or computer by feeding it a paradox. The machine goes biddy beedy beedy, it smokes and sparks, and the hero saves the day.

    The Bloecher Effect is like that. Anyone encountering the Roswell press release and the story about it has odds of being cognitively flatlined by it.

    The Effect is different than a meme, which is passive. The Effect is active, an interaction.

    It first appeared in Ted Bloecher's Report on the UFO Wave of 1947 in the mid-60s. Then in B&M. In Crash At Corona, Stan Friedman lists it among pr scenarios and commented it was "Quite possible", when it is quite impossible. Roswell advocates who insist Marcel was "humiliated" and "scorned" in Ft Worth, suffer from it.

    But it is the skeptics who apparently have no defenses against it. Immediately, PG posted the idea that the guys at the RAAF were bored teenagers who wrote the pr as a giggle. No matter they were grown men, adults, officers, living in town, with their wives, and some with their children. Encountering the Effect transforms the scene into a Twilight Zone episode of Sgt Bilko or Gomer Pyle.

    Zoam extends it to every person involved (the "small group"). Every one was suffering saucer elation. If he extends the elation to include AAF senior command (which he must), then he is no longer evidence of the Bloecher Effect, but of paranoid delusion.

    Roswell needs skeptics, but it needs skeptics who aren't brain dead. But Ramey and Ft Worth were directly and specifically involved before the press release was even written. There is no escaping that conclusion.


    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • Don claimed: "There were UFO things going on in the region besides the Brazel news story, before and after."

    Then he claimed, "They" did this... "They" did that... Doing his half-baked make-it-up, completely subjective, sixty-five years after-the-fact rationalizations of events and behaviours--bordering on conspiracy mongering--all within his "UFO" delusion.

    Since you refuse to support your extraordinary pronouncements, Don, could you please explain to us what is the "Bloecher Effect?" Not all of us have been keeping up with your fantasy world of imaginary facts, relations and "effects."

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • The Bloecher effect is based on incommensurable events. The more rational one is in using logic to unravel the core mystery, the more bizarre the explanations become.

    An equivalence equation based on a fundamental mismatch between the markers of the event that make anomalous and the knowledge to be gained by using prosaic causation ends up with equally bizarre scenarios.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • BTW..This is also another intelligence tool used to promulgate untraceable yet provocative rumors that state a possibility that requires corroboration. Other words for this are misdirection of attention and inducing a perception without having to provide evidence for it. It places the dupe in a interdiction that produces a quandary between yes and no that is an attraction to the prey. Nature uses this all the time. Its called camouflage.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • Think of Venus Flytrap.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • "[Roswell] was merely a moment of "flying saucer" hysteria affecting otherwise rational human beings. Ranchers, newspapermen or military people, it doesn't matter one bit, they were all just caught up in a typical small-group scare."

    Don; The concept "small group scare" is mainstream social psychology; small-group scares actually exist in the world. The initial Roswell hysteria is a textbook example of a small-group scare. Your "Bloecher Effect" is Internet crackpottery.

    That you've imagined some universal explanation for all your perceived irrational behaviours and discontinuous events, that you've given it a name, that you see it everywhere apparently, that it's inspired by science-fiction and found in books by ufoolergists, that you imagine it in what everyone writes--skeptics and Believers alike--tells us more about the mind of Don than purported expressions of the imaginary "Bloecher Effect." It's crank pseudoscience, a mere ad-hoc rationalization.

    Thank you, Don!

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • Zoam
    This effect can also be self induced and I doubt it is pseudo science when it is preeminently observable. Think of the 2000 computer scare or the 2012 Mayan fiasco. Both had effects while being non existent.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • Zoam "the imaginary "Bloecher Effect.""

    Bloecher, Report on the UFO Wave of 1947

    Berlitz & Moore, The Roswell Incident

    Stanton Friedman, Crash At Corona

    AFOSI, The Roswell Report

    Karl Pflock, Roswell, Inconvenient Facts and the Will To Believe


    Do you need page numbers?

    And commonly, of course, comments blogs about Roswell.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • Klass coined a term for a disease affecting abductees: Hopkins' Syndrome.
    I do not know if Klass applied this to all abductees or only those who were investigated by Budd Hopkins.

    Maybe we need a name for those who are besotted by Roswell as ET. There are quite a few. I would hesitate to call it 'Friedman's Syndrome', but it deserves a name of some kind.

    By Blogger cda, at Saturday, January 26, 2013  

  • "Zoam extends it to every person involved (the "small group"). Every one was suffering saucer elation. If he extends the elation to include AAF senior command (which he must), then he is no longer evidence of the Bloecher Effect, but of paranoid delusion. "Roswell needs skeptics..."

    But I said nothing of the sort. That's just another straw-man excuse to reject a simple real-world explanation for equally mundane events; now that's the "Bloecher Effect" defined. It's a mere device--similar to Internet cranks' phony "model agnosticism," which also employs the straw-man tactic--to pretend that a fringe topic is unresolved and so must be endlessly considered: the Popperian definition of pseudoscience.

    No, Don, Roswell doesn't need skeptics, it's a total non-issue, that was determined in one day sixty-five years ago. The laughable "flying saucer" conspiracy fantasies manufactured by a few junky-book-writing ufoolergists decades later are irrelevant.

    Traditional expository debunking paid Believers the compliment of rational debate; armed with the Null and Psychosocial hypotheses, debunkers have destroyed the very reason for belief, as Scientific realists we know Believers Aren't Even Wrong!

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Sunday, January 27, 2013  

  • "The laughable "flying saucer" conspiracy fantasies manufactured by a few junky-book-writing ufoolergists decades later are irrelevant."

    And what does that have to do with what I write? All you can comment about is ET and UFOs, because you are obsessed with them and with ufologists. I am not.

    At this point all you are doing is hanging your rants -- your argument by adjectives -- on what I write because I pissed you off. That's all.

    I perfectly understand your arguments -- even more than you do, I think, it just is unrelated to what I write, except through whatever filter you read things through -- oh, right. Your ET and UFOs and "ufoolergists" obsession.


    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Sunday, January 27, 2013  

  • "Do you need page numbers?"

    Those "examples" are probably as imaginary as ones offered here. I don't doubt that you believe you see it in those texts; what I'm skeptical of is the reality of the "effect" itself. It was prompted by your perception of ambiguity and contradiction surrounding the Roswell press release--of which no copy exists--and takes the form of a typical Internet crank meta-rationale: an excuse to ignore obvious facts and the mundane contingencies inherent in real-world events; to imagine your own "facts" and relations and pretend they're real; to appeal to ignorance and so continue with fantastical conspiracy mongering based solely in inconsequential minutiae.

    There are websites devoted to why people hold demonstrably false beliefs and the devices they employ to maintain them. They run from the "Baloney Detection Kit" to "Crank Dot Net." You might study them to avoid looking like a loony noob.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Monday, January 28, 2013  

  • Zoam: "Those "examples" are probably as imaginary as ones offered here."

    So, you haven't read them. I guess that's why you refer to AFOSI as "ufoolersts". I am sure the ETH'rs are as amused as I am. So, you have no reason to assume it is imaginary.

    To remove it from your prickly sensitivity about UFOs: A causal relationship is asserted. I respond: the "effect" and the "cause" do not exist. There is no causal relationship. The supposed cause and effect are conterminous and of one piece. This is undeniable. If you disagree, prove me wrong. It is just logic applied to a narrative.

    But, the cause/effect error is seductive, in the case of Roswell press release story. Especially for Roswell skeptics, but some advocates, as well. It depends on their presuppositions about Roswell.

    Based on your comments, I'd say it shouldn't matter to you.

    Ok. That's it. Good luck, Zoam.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Monday, January 28, 2013  

  • If only Haut had lived a bit longer, the Roswell nuts could have gotten him to admit that it was HE who piloted their sacred saucer to its ignoble end. The press release was just caused by panic.

    I would not be at all surprised to see a third Haut affidavit from these scholars....this one posthumous from spirit interviews.

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Tuesday, January 29, 2013  

  • Lance...

    You hit the nail right on its head: the UFO vanguard, at the time and thereafter [1978], screwed up everything, including their "witnesses" -- Haut, Marcel, the younger Brazel, Sleppy, et al.

    What a mess they made.

    And some (Rudiak) continue to do so in 2013.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, January 29, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home