UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, May 19, 2013

Aztec is (really) Roswell

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

rosnews.jpg

A recent discovery of material, thought to be linked to the Roswell incident, seems, indeed, to be so.

While the provenance of that material is being sought, evidence that it derives from the 1947 Roswell area is circumstantially solid.

Here’s the scenario, as we understand it…..

A group of geologists, working in an area north of Roswell, stumbled upon an Army mop-up of what appeared to be an accident.

An accident is inferred by the “evidence” gathered and extant – currently provided to news media and research facilities for their evaluation.

One of the geologists, despite being warned along with his colleagues, not to obtain any information from the accident site, did snap, surreptitiously, some photos of what the group had inadvertently come across.

The geologists were also cautioned not to discuss what they had seen.

The evidence remained hidden until, by happenstance, it was recovered during a legal matter, and subsequently proffered to members of Kevin Randle’s Dream team.

Following the scrutiny the evidence has been subject to, one finds that the “evidence” supports elements of the Aztec crashed-saucer story, recounted by Frank Scully in his 1950 book, Behind the Flying Saucers.

behind.jpg

The geologist whose wife had squirreled away the evidence was a working intimate of Silas Newton, one of the Scully informants, who was, along with Leo Gebauer, ultimately discredited by machinations of the U.S. government and the U.S. Air Force.

To keep her husband from the Newton/GeBauer fate, the geologist’s wife kept his Roswell evidence hidden until its recent find after her death.

But how does Aztec become connected to Roswell?

While the Aztec story began, allegedly, at a lecture by an “unidentified” scientist at the University of Denver in March  1950, Frank Scully became privy to details of the Roswell crash, via Silas Newton and Leo GeBauer who had obtained information about the Roswell incident from intimates in the government with whom they worked in their oil companies and related research.

Scully, initially, was not given the location of the supposed saucer crash but received the location from Silas Newton who was told by Dr, Gee (Leo GeBauer) that the crashed saucer was near Aztec.

Passing on the Roswell information to Scully caused anxieties of an extreme kind to the government when its agencies found out that Scully had been given suppressed information about what happened near Roswell in 1947, but relocated to Aztec in 1948, to prevent the Roswell crash from becoming “unsecret.”

The government arranged for GeBauer and Newton to corrupt the information they had already provided to Scully.

Aztec had experienced a strange episode in 1948, one similar in scope to the Roswell incident but not well supported as Roswell had been.

Roswell had experienced a true saucer crash, with a recovery of bodies, while Aztec’s saucer and bodies were not clearly defined and its supporting evidence was evanescent.

The Air Force decided to mix, using GeBauer and Newton, the Roswell “facts” with the Aztec “non-facts.”

Should Scully’s book become grist for a national awareness that flying saucers were, indeed, craft of extraterrestrial visitors -- which it did – the content could be debunked easily, full of rumored information rather than actual information which was what Roswell had produced.

Roswell’s information was suppressed by all the hither-dither that has become the bulk of the Roswell myth.

Scully’s book was prepared to reopen the Roswell story so Scully’s venue was shifted to Aztec, where the information was iffy, at best.

The ploy did not work initially, and Scully’s book became a headliner.

The Air Force then had to rid the Scully oeuvre of its essential informants: GeBaurer and Newton, credible men at the time and well-connected.

A case of fraud was concocted against Scully’s confidants, and promoted by an expose in a book by San Francisco reporter, J.P. Cahn.

dpost.jpg

Newton and GeBauer were convicted of fraud, and Scully’s story was dismissed as a tale conceived to perpetuate the fraud.

Aztec was and is tainted by that fraud conviction and Roswell was not opened to new scrutiny as its renewal was stifled by its being wrapped into the Aztec story, and disguised thereby.

The story and evidence of alien bodies derives from Roswell and ended up in Aztec per Scully: Page 26 ff. (in the Popular Library paperback, 1951)

Metal remnants (debris) was intrinsic to Roswell but was inserted into the bogus Aztec scenario per Scully: pages 40/159 (in the Popular Library paperback, 1951)

Scully was, indeed, duped but not by Silas Newton and Leo GeBauer alone, but rather by a brilliant disinformation contrivance of the U.S. Air Force.

scully.jpg

Yes, Scully was proffered material documenting a flying saucer crash, but that material pertained to Rowell.

Yes, his wife did see photos of unearthly bodies, but those photos came from the Roswell incident and will factor into the new Roswell probe.

Yes, something did happen near Aztec in 1948, but that something was prosaic and mundane by Roswell standards.

Aztec is a cover story, nothing more.

It’s Roswell where the “action” really took place, and the new evidence, when revealed, will bear that out.

Read Behind the Flying Saucers to really see what happened near Roswell in July 1947.

RRRGroup 

65 Comments:

  • Well, OK. We read it here first.

    By Blogger Larry, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Rich,

    Interesting post. Is this what Tony B. was alluding to, as far as the breaking Rosewell discovery?

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Hahahahaha, Larry...

    Yes you did read it here "first" -- in the context of new "evidence" that we hope will see the light of day soon.

    What one reads about Aztec applies to Roswell and that should become obvious shortly.

    (You crack me up.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Tim:

    Yes, it does pertain to what Mr. Bragalia was alluding to.

    The new "evidence" -- when confirmed -- will mimic Aztec related information, in Mr. Ramsey's book and Scully's.

    One will be able to see how Roswell's erratic witness testimony is the nub of Aztec's even more erratic testimonies, and how Aztec is a contrivance based upon Roswell's subliminal story circulating in 1947 and 1948 among cognoscenti.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • If Randle is in possession of evidence which fundamentally alters the Roswell narrative, why did he give testimony at Bassett's Citizen Hearing which he presumably no longer believes to be accurate.

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • I think Ross that Kevin is in possession of Roswell "evidence" that compliments his long held position on the 1947 incident.

    The Aztec affiliation is our conjecture.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Rich,

    Ref your reply to Ross Evans. If the Aztec affiliation is your (our?) conjecture, does Randle agree with the proposed linkage of the Aztec and Roswell?

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • No, Tim...


    I can't imagine anyone agreeing with our (or my) Aztec/Roswell hypothesis, and Kevin least of all.

    But the linkage I see is obvious and will become even more so when and if the new "evidence" holds up and is presented to all of us.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • You are a little pot-stirrer, Rich!

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • I have too much time on my hands, Lance.

    Idleness is the devil's workshop isn't it?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Does this new information add any support to the MJ-12 core documents?

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • No, Ross...no MJ-12 connection.

    The new "evidence" is multiple, after one aspect is verified.

    Aztec devotes will have at our conjecture here, over at Frank Warren's web-site I think -- The UFO Chronicles.

    We have tried to put 2 and 2 together to get 4, rather than the usual 5 which Roswell mavens keep coming up with.

    I mean that Roswell believers have got so much misinformation mixed into the real information that they'll never arrive at the Roswell reality.

    And you see how that goes over at Kevin's blog, where you are trying to provide some sensible remarks.

    The visitors there are so desirous of one-upping others, that the discussion devolves into sniping and snarky remarks....a lot of sparks but little fire.

    We're hoping to clean the Roswell and Aztec palates so they might be examined anew, without all the accumulated detritus.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Rich, All,

    Never a dull moment here at the "The UFO Iconoclast(s)."

    It would appear that Lance and I have agreed with each other once again (so that's at least twice :^)) re the "UFO Pot."

    Given the gravity of the admissions (in the article), i.e., photographic evidence from a Roswell Incident location, until said evidence, photographic or otherwise can be evaluated, methinks any discourse is an exercise.

    In that vein:

    Almost all Flying Saucer/UFO crash stories have commonalities, e.g., downed vehicle, bodies and military recovery etc. Aztec & Roswell fall into that category and are close together by date of occurrence. Moreover, both stories have included tales of photographs.

    Beyond that, and without arguing the veracity of either case, the evidence separates them, beginning with locations.

    Setting that aside for a moment, and going back to some of the declarations, which have got my attention, I'm curious to know what evidence supports the following statements:

    "The geologist ... was a working intimate of Silas Newton."

    "To keep her husband from the Newton/GeBauer fate . . .."

    "The Air Force decided to mix, using GeBauer and Newton, the Roswell “facts” with the Aztec 'non-facts.'"

    "The government arranged for GeBauer and Newton to corrupt the information...."

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Part One:

    Frank, in his inimical way, poses questions that need answers, and I'll try to provide a few, pointing out that this isn't my story, but one that others will need to bring forth along with the important new evidence
    that came their way.

    The geologist, part of a group, has been identified, and was a working member of Silas Newton's oil exploration team.

    His name is not mine to disclose, at this time, but when the story unfolds, if no one names him, I will.

    How the evidence was found allows me to infer that the geologist's wife was protecting him (and herself).

    While I have an overlay of the find, I don't have the specifics. such a location of the find but I do know how the find came about.

    And it's that which allows me to conclude that the wife was acting in a protective manner.

    Since GeBauer and Newton were privy to what the geologist came upon, with his "proof," they knew what and where the geologist had come across.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Part Two:

    Since Frank Scully heard about the University of Denver lecture which outlined the "crash," and had written about flying saucers in his "Variety" column, he was contacted by Silas newton, who had previously sent him a laudatory note about a George Bernard Shaw piece that Scully had written. (Page 34 ff. of the Behind the Flying Saucer paperback.)

    Newton, who had heard details about a saucer crash from his cohort, GeBauer, passed the information on to Scully, but had changed the locale from Roswell to Aztec (where a crash was rumored to have taken place).

    The reason Newton changed the locale was that the geologist who had imparted the Roswell details would have been in trouble with the military for disclosing something he, the geologist, had been warned not to disclose.

    Scully went to the Air Force to see what they had to say about the "crash" but got the run-around.

    The Air Force then went into a protective mode and got Newton and GeBauer (with whom the government was in bed) to press Scully with the Aztec contrivance -- the reason? To prevent Roswell's secret from being opened -- the Army having crunched that incident into oblivion, or so they thought.

    If Scully's book had been about Roswell, with all that was extant, still, in 1948, the public would find out that alien beings had crashed on earth. So the military had to mix Scully's tale with falsehoods to discredit him and his book, which they could not keep from publication. (Scully had cachet and a wide audience.)

    The problem for the Air Force was the fact that some credible people knew about Roswell and one had evidence that was being passed around: photos and/or film.

    Newton and GeBauer had to back-track.

    They had to keep Scully from putting forth details of a crashed extraterrestrial saucer, which they did.

    Then, having done their "duty," the military needed them no longer and pressed a fraud concoction on them.

    Now all this is conjecture, on my part, but it can be inferred from what happened, the Aztec details which mimicked what was known openly about Roswell, and what was done with some tangible proof of a crash -- hidden by a woman who was friends with people in the higher echelons of government, including Dwight Eisenhower.

    Reading Scully's book and aligning what he wrote with what has been said to have happened in Roswell, by credible sources in 1947, either Aztec was a remarkable recurrence of what happened near Roswell or Aztec is a contrived fable meant to keep Roswell's incident secret.

    Connecting the dots will be easier when more information is provided by those who have access to the specific details (which I do not have).

    What I have is a patina of information, from several sources, which makes me think that something significant happened near Roswell and Scully's Aztec tale is a rather complete presentation of that Roswell event.

    Persons are free to see it all as nonsense, but that means they haven't either read Scully's book or are too warped by the Roswell mythos, which is full of extraneous
    flotsam, such as the Brazel debris and Mogul mischief.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 20, 2013  

  • Rich,

    You wrote:

    Frank, in his inimical way, poses questions that need answers...

    I hope that's not how I came off as that certainly wasn't my intent. I always try to express myself in a diplomatic fashion at the very least.

    The questions on the other hand . . . well the devil's in the details.

    My query was for supporting evidence for the claims made in the article, beginning with the connection to Newton.

    To that you've offered up more anecdotes. I don't need the name of the "geologist"; I'm seeking the evidence that supports any of the previously cited declarations.

    I am very familiar with the people surrounding Newton in the late '40's (in fact my dining room table is currently filled with Aztec minutiae) none of them fit the geologist alluded to in the article.

    Unless I missed something, I don't see any "supporting evidence, (re my previous query) just more anecdotes and interpretation of events.

    In the article you wrote:

    While the Aztec story began, allegedly, at a lecture by an “unidentified” scientist at the University of Denver in March 1950

    This is not where the Aztec story began.

    Above you wrote:

    "... he was contacted by Silas newton, who had previously sent him a laudatory note about a George Bernard Shaw piece that Scully had written ...."

    Actually, Newton reached out to Scully regarding author, "Frank Harris," whom Scully ghosted, the book "Frank Harris's life of Bernard Shaw." Frank Harris was the common denominator between Scully and Newton, as they both knew him.

    You wrote:

    "Now all this is conjecture, on my part..."

    Without any supporting evidence, or any evidence for that matter (pertaining to the Aztec-Roswell mishmash), what we have is a campfire story (no offense). Of course many feel that–that describes Ufology as a whole.

    I'm intrigued by the declarations made in the piece (re the geologist and his pics), and look forward to see where that goes; however, there isn't enough known data (by your own admission) to connect it to Roswell, Aztec or some other event (as we speak).

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Tuesday, May 21, 2013  

  • FRank:

    Forgive me.

    I didn't mean "inimical" at all, and went to bed last night realizing that it wasn't the word I wanted to use.

    I was thinking of "inimitable" and it wasn't even a Freudian typo on my part, just a slip of the fingers, and brain.

    You are never hostile, at last I've never experienced such.

    So, again, forgive me.

    Now to your concerns...

    Once the name of the geologist is provided, one can easily connect him to Newton's oil operation.

    And yes, you're right, Aztec didn't begin with the lecture at The University of Denver.

    The lecture was about saucers and their recovery or crashes: Roswell, not named specifically but the germ of which intrigued Scully.

    Aztec became the "cover" for Scully's saucer crash tale, since Roswell was the real story being told.

    Aztec is a real red-herring.

    Newton and GeBauer promoting Aztec for the reasons I've cited.

    The connection of Aztec to Roswell lies in the details of both.

    Take Scully's content and compare it to what was reported about Roswell in 1947.

    Of course only cognoscenti knew about Roswell, as Ramey had halted a full-blown media evaluation of the event.

    The lecturer (scientist) knew about Roswell, and what had transpired there, and Newton came to know also from the geologist who worked with him.

    Newton pressed the issue with Scully, and Scully relates it to the Air Force who shuts him down.

    But Scully goes ahead with the Roswell story, only changing the locale at the insistence of GeBauer and Newton.

    Yes, it's a campfire story, but one as feasible as the contrived Aztec tale, and post 1947 Roswell mythology.

    Again, the geologist and his colleagues stumbled upon an Army mop-up in 1947 near Roswell.

    The geologist obtained evidence of what hey had stumbled upon.

    That evidence was proffered to Newton, and others.

    The Air Force finding out about the "evidence" took steps to squash the tale before it went "viral" or something like that in 1950.

    The "evidence" pertained to Roswell as the geologist's survey took place north of Roswell.

    The geologist and his colleagues were nowhere near Aztec.

    So the "evidence" can't be connected to Aztec, despite efforts to make it so.

    Aztec has no bona fides.

    Roswell does, although Roswell's bona fides have been marred by the late 1970s intrusions of certain UFO "researchers."

    I'm suggesting that readers here go to Scully's book.

    When the new "evidence" is put forward, they'll see that Roswell was what Scully was writing about.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, May 21, 2013  

  • "When the new 'evidence' is put forward, they'll see that Roswell was what Scully was writing about".

    Why is 'evidence' put in quotes?

    Is there any real new evidence, or are you and certain others merely adding more & more confusion into this increasingly tiresome and complicated tale?

    We urgently need to tie it all up with MJ-12 and maybe even with the evidence Greer and Co presented to the committee of ex-politicians.

    Is Stan Friedman privy to this new evidence (or 'evidence')? As the prime instigator of Roswell, and a secondary, or tertiary one of Aztec, he certainly needs to be.

    It all makes for a fascinating expenditure of time and maybe money for those who have nothing better to do.

    By Blogger cda, at Tuesday, May 21, 2013  

  • Christopher...

    I doubt that Stan Friedman has been apprised of the new "evidence."

    And I'm putting the evidence in quote marks, as I suspect that it might not be accepted as valid by skeptics or those with sensible questioning minds.

    I'm hedging my bets (of course) based upon how anything from or about Roswell is suspect.

    My position, as you know, is that something happened near Roswell; that something was exotic but not necessarily extraterrestrial.

    I think Nick Redfern is with me about that.

    That the "evidence" is worthy comes from people I trust who have seen it and who feel it is authentic.

    How it was discovered, along with circumstances of that find provide, for me, a scintilla of proof but, like you, I wish to remain cautious.

    I present my Aztec is Roswell post as Lance Moody hints: mostly to raise hob.

    If nothing is revealed or pans out, I couldn't care less.

    After all, that's "ufology" as Gilles Fernandez often tells us, and Frank Warren seems to agree.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, May 21, 2013  

  • Is it not more probable that Reich weapons made it to the USA than EBE's whose skill at flying is so poor they crash routinely? Moreover, has no one read Nick Redfern on this subject?

    http://desertdarkness.blogspot.com/2012/01/progeria-dwarfssummer-47.html

    By Blogger Judith, at Tuesday, May 21, 2013  

  • Like we used to say when anything bad happened in the 70's- "It's the Russians"! LOL.

    By Blogger Unknown, at Tuesday, May 21, 2013  

  • Judith,


    What is more probable is irrelevant, what actually happened is what we concern ourselves with.

    Redfern's explanation is no more supported by evidence than the load of rubbish Jacobsen put in her Area 51 book.

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Tuesday, May 21, 2013  

  • Ross:

    I always find it interesting that people refer to (as you have) "Redfern's explanation" for Roswell.

    Despite what many have assumed or said, it is not my explation, nor has it ever been.

    The story has been around for years. The only difference is that because I have highlighted it to a larger degree, people somehow think the story started with me - which is about as far away from the truth as it's possible to get.

    Leonard Stringfield was told the Japanese angle in 1990 and published the info in 1991.

    John Keel, in the early 90s, published an article on Japanese manned balloon flights over the US in the 1940s.

    The Australian researcher, Keith Basterfield, got the same story as me (not same sources though) before my book came out and put me in touch with his source post-publication.

    In 1997, Popular Mechanics magazine stated it had been told of a forthcoming disclosure of documents that would tell of a Japanese equivalent of Paperclip (which saw the German scientists brought over to the US post-WW2) and that this would explain Roswell.

    There are even files linking Lincoln County (where the crash happened) to Japanese experiments. These are official files I have referenced previously in blog posts. I'll dig the link out and post.

    All of this is years (in fact, decades in some examples above!) before I was even looking into that angle.

    And for the record, when you say "Redfern's explanation is no more supported by evidence," that is very true.

    However, you forgot to mention an important fact: NO scenario for Roswell is supported by evidence. They are all supported by testimony. That's a very different thing.

    If there was any actual evidence for any theory, I wouldn't be writing these words.

    The ET angle is only supported by testimony. And as interesting and as vital as testimony is, testimony is not evidence.

    Same re the crash-test dummies, Mogul balloons, and weather balloons: no evidence, just circumstantial

    That said, the Dream Team data that Rich refers to is definitely going to stir things up.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Nick,

    When I refer to it as your explanation I mean in the sense that it is the one you have proffered in answer to the question 'what really happened at Roswell in July 1947?'.

    And if ghastly experiments on mutant children are the answer to the riddle, why the decades of secrecy, of witness intimidation and phoney investigations? I mean in terms of moral degeneracy Western government have already done far worse things prior to and since 1947 which are undisputed public knowledge.

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Ross:

    Yes, but you still miss my point: I am not the only one who has proffered the explantion. That was my point: the theory has been offered (along with sources) for decades. But most of those other accounts went under the radar or were ignored. But, it's a story that is often seen (very incorrectly) as "Nick Redfern's theory."

    If I was the only one to get such accounts, yes I would be deeply suspicious.

    But, with things like Popular Mechanics, Keith Basterfield, Stringfield, Keel (and many more) all having strands of an identical story - but long before me - leads me to believe it should be addressed and investigated.

    For the record, i do believe the truth of Roswell is deeply buried. But I don't agree with you re the phony investigation comment.

    I dont - at all - think the Mogul balloon or crash-test dummy scenarios explain Roswell.

    But, I do think they were genuine attempts to uncover the truth, but which failed, and as a result had the effect of actually increasing the cries of "Conspiracy!"

    My view is that today's Air Force knows no more about Roswell than we do.

    I suspect that the truth of Roswell is hidden not by "the government" or "the Air Force," as such, but by what are designated SAPs - Special Access Programs.

    I don't believe the USAF were in anyway the bad guys in their Roswell investigations of 1994 and 1997. But, I do think that from a public relations angle, it backfired because it really did look suspicious.

    But I think the AF went looking, found nothing, but genuinely tried their best to come up with something that seemed possible, even if they couldn't prove it for sure.

    So, for me, these investigations of 94 and 97 weren't phony at all, but they definitely failed to lay the matter to rest - in fact, they achieved the exact opposite.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • ANY new investigation into Roswell will have the inevitable result of "stirring things up", as Nick put it. But not for long.

    This is because too many have a fixed mindset. Ergo, as soon as something contrariwise is put forward, these people immediately jump to defend their entrenched positions.

    I shall very probably do the same.

    Yes, the 'new' evidence from the petroleum geologists (or is it archaeologists) MAY cause something of a stir, but I predict it will soon die out, for the reasons I gave above. Give it 12 months, maximum?

    Meanwhile officialdom will remain silent and disinterested, as will the scientific fraternity.

    By Blogger cda, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • CDA:

    It's Geologists....only.

    No Archaeologists, oil teams.

    I see some hedging on the part of those in the know, as some UFO troublemakers have entered the discussion with faulty asides, at Kevin's blog mostly.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • As long as it shows a crashed saucer and and Army guys carrying it away, we skeptics are gonna be looking pretty foolish!

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Lance:

    I don't think you have to worry; whatever the "evidence" is it will get a going over by skeptics, and should.

    I'm beginning to see some back-peddling however, since some people who have no idea what the "evidence" is are trying to pretend they do, and may muck up the disclosure.

    And those who have seen the "evidence" are starting to worry that quidnuncs may spook the owner of the evidence, who will withdraw it.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Chainsofthesea, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • I will conjecture, as I said above, that this evidence will either be a damp squib or that it will cause a brief stir and then slowly die out.

    Let us apply simple common sense. Why should an event now 65 years old suddenly, at this distance of time, produce evidence so startling that the course of science is changed? The obvious question is: why has not this evidence, if it has any value at all, been produced long long ago, say within 48 hours of the incident? If these alleged photos have any value to science or in fact to anyone, where have they been since July '47?

    I get the impression that someone, somewhere, is always going to pop up with 'new' Roswell evidence, just to keep the ET myth going. If not, then another angle (like Nick Redfern's Japanese angle) will pop up to create a temporary distraction and keep the UFO community mildly interested. And so on. There will always be 'something extra' to maintain the Roswell myth. In 2047, at its centenary, something else will rear its head. Wait and see!

    There are endless variations on this - but they have similarities. They all either promise 'more to come' (usually by producing anonymous witnesseses who were there or descended from people who were there), or they hint at secret withheld documents or photographs which are said to be 'dynamite'.

    Meanwhile the scientific world continues on, completely unimpressed. The military continues on, also uninterested and unimpressed.

    But interest is maintained by the UFO community, or rather those parts of it that cannot, or will not, let it die. Roswell is one of those cases that cannot die.

    Certain people are out to see it is kept alive, to age 100 at least. We are already two-thirds of the way there.

    By Blogger cda, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Chains...

    It seems, as someone commented at Kevin Randle's blog, that the Dream Team signed non-disclosure agreements in order to see the "evidence."

    That boxed them in.

    It was a dumb move, but had to be done I guess to see what was what.

    The Dream Team is trying to be judicious, in order to avoid and Alien Autopsy fiasco.

    But there is a source for the evidence: Alice Scully or her family.

    Yes, Mrs. Scully was connected to Aztec but what she has seen or has isn't, although she thinks it is -- duped as Frank Scully was into thinking he was reporting on an Aztec crash.

    The evidence she saw or has was from Roswell, as one will see when it is offered to the public.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • CDA:

    You know, as do I, that news organizations have shunned the new "evidence."

    Why?

    Because authenticating it would take a lot of time and money, and they, like you, see little value in the Roswell hokum.

    Even if what they have seen appears to be true and from Roswell, they don't give a good goddam, which validates your view of the Roswell story: the whole thing is a lot of hogwash.

    Nevertheless, I hear that the Dream Team is prepared to continue their "investigation" -- damn the torpedoes and full steam ahead.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Per Rich:

    "It seems, as someone commented at Kevin Randle's blog, that the Dream Team signed non-disclosure agreements in order to see the "evidence."

    The very type of form that all of them have denigrated, now they were forced to sign one!

    I so do love irony.

    Tim

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • RRRGroup,

    So there is this hitherto unknown evidence pertaining to the Roswell incident available, hints at which have been made for months, yet the speculation engendered by these hints may result in it being withdrawn never to be seen again.

    Now, this is where I have to wear my sceptic hat, because the only thing I see coming out of this increasingly tedious saga is a KickStarter campaign intended to raise funds to secure the rights to this 'evidence'

    I mean, non-disclosure agreements; really? Are we about to be dealt the great historical irony that disclosure is brought about by someone signing an agreement not to do so. Or does the argot tell us that this is more about the UFO business rather than the business of UFO's

    Tempus narrabo

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Ross:

    Unfortunately there have missteps in the pursuit of this new find.

    And now that I, and others, have tried to force the issue, interlopers have entered the fray, spewing comments, mostly at Kevin Randle's blog, that could ultimately upset the Roswell apple-cart.

    The Dream Team has information that the rest of us do not have, and I know they are treating their unique find as valuable.

    But we who have entered upon their discovery have to be careful not to corrupt the ongoing investigation.

    However, someone on the Dream Team has talked to an outsider who knows things that I do not know, nor anyone else knew, and that someone has made public some information -- a disclosure agreement and other details -- at Kevin's blog to get some unwarranted attention.

    That self-aggrandizing could jeopardize all the effort that some Dream Team members has exerted to get their hands on the new "evidence" and determine its actual worth.

    I don't think there is a motive to make money from this new evidence, at least not on the part of the Dream Team.

    As for the owner or possessor of the evidence, that's another matter.

    We'll see where this goes.

    My interest, as loopy as it seems, is to show that Aztec, as presented in Scully's book is really a rendition of what happened near Roswell in 1947 and has nothing to do with Aztec at all.

    The DT's new evidence factor's into my view as it is from Roswell allegedly but is noted by Scully in his book and the subsequent investigation of Aztec by Scott and Sue Ramsey and Frank Warren.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Hi!

    Where are the photos, i wanna see them.

    By Blogger Michael Mu, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Michael:

    We all want to see them.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 22, 2013  

  • Oh pulleeez, as cda points out, much ado about nothing.

    Keep the fire burning, even though it burnt out decades ago, even though it was never lit at all, just a phantom flame.

    Yes I know what you will tell me Rich: I am not privy to the 'dynamite', if I were blabla

    As long as you think there is something to Roswell other than the mundane, you are keeping this palaver nonsense going, and are contributing ever more to burying ever deeper the dead corpse of ufology. Even if you tell me, no you don't think it's ET related, just something 'exotic' (without any smoking gun, yes I know it's coming... oooooh I'm so on tenterhooks. No not really), you are fueling the Roswell nonsense, and dragging ufology further into the depths of derivative third-rate urban folklore pulp shlock.

    So say a year from now and nothing substantial has materialized at all, will Rich fess up it was much ado about nothing? Oh wait, there's that non-disclosure information we now have, the get out of jail free card. Oh wait it will be disclosed in 2020 or 2030. Yeah whatever.

    Give it a rest. It's beyond embarrassing.

    By Blogger Lawrence, at Thursday, May 23, 2013  

  • Lawrence:

    You make heavy. good points.

    But this is "ufology" right?

    A pseudo-practice -- I won't even dignify it by calling it a pseudo-science.

    It's a fun thing, when all is said and done.

    I've tried to make that clear as my position for some time now.

    So I take your mild rebuke in stride, and agree with your stance pretty much.

    Rehashing Roswell is akin to playing golf: trying, day after day, by some, to get a little ball in a hole -- totally meaningless, wasteful, and time-consuming, without any real value.

    Ufology or Roswell is my game of golf -- and that of others.

    Harmless, stupid, but fun.

    In a world gone crazy, what else is there?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, May 23, 2013  

  • In a world gone crazy, what else is there?

    Bach.

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Thursday, May 23, 2013  

  • Yes, there is Bach...

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, May 23, 2013  

  • And when will the photos released?

    By Blogger Michael Mu, at Friday, May 24, 2013  

  • If there are photos, Michael, they are not under the purview or control of anyone in the UFO community.

    So whatever new evidence has been found, it will have to be garnered gingerly.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, May 24, 2013  

  • Rich,

    Should there be photos in existence, why so long coming to light?

    I tend to take cda's view that this would have surely come out decades ago...if not for notoriety, but for profit.

    Then the next task would be establishing the veracity of said photos...

    Tim

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Friday, May 24, 2013  

  • Tim:

    As I explained in my posting -- evidently not clearly enough -- the photos were squirreled away, hidden, by the wife of the geologist, who feared reprisal from the government because the Army prohibited anyone on the geology team from disclosing what they had seen.

    And of course the provenance and legitimacy of any evidence, photos and otherwise, has to be determined.

    I think Kevin's Dream Team is doing just that, as my comments above keep indicating.

    This is higher calculus folks, just a story that needs to run its course, and be understood by what has been written by me and others, right here, above.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, May 24, 2013  

  • RRRGroup,

    If she was so in fear why not simply destroy all of the material in question? More than that, the one thing I find most bothersome is how convenient this all is.

    Randle and his merry men set out to find hitherto unknown facets of the Roswell story, and that's exactly what happens to have come their way; pending their signing of non-disclosure agreements, paying an undisclosed sum to the source of the information, drawing up a contract giving the source a cut of any book, TV, film and other media deals.

    Team somnium has been big on hype, and yet entirely lacking in delivery. How tempting even the shadiest of ports must look in a storm.

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Friday, May 24, 2013  

  • Ross:

    I imagine the geologist's wife felt what her husband had captured was so earth-shattering, she couldn't destroy it, but also, sensibly, didn't want repercussions that could ruin her and her husband's life.

    It was a dilemma, and I think she handled it splendidly.

    As for Kevin Randle and his Dream Team, I don't see anything venal in how they handled this, even if I think they painted themselves into a corner by catering to the "owner" of the evidence, whom I feel has a greedy motivation in the matter.

    Anthony Bragalia says otherwise, but Tony sees people in a better light than I do.

    If there is a taint of money-grubbing by Kevin Randle's merry men, as you call them, I don't see it.

    The fellows are spending time, money, and effort to get this evidence out to the public.

    If they make a few bucks in the process, good for them.

    But I don't think that is their motivation, and I know it isn't Tony Bragalia's.

    Mr. Bragalia and Kevin Randle are honorable men.

    Again, I don't like that they have to cater to the owner, but they're in the arena and I am not, so I have to defer to their judgment.

    I am known to skewer some UFO "researchers" for their attempts to capitalize on the UFO mystery by making more of some UFO events than those UFO events deserve, and Roswell is one of them.

    But in this instance, the venomous remarks about Randle, Bragalia, and the other team members are way off base.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, May 24, 2013  

  • RRRGroup,

    I think you've misread me. I am suggesting that the gung ho, hubris laden 'Dream Team' effort created a need for that rhetoric to be lived up to. I am further suggesting that given this need they might be vulnerable to huxterism.

    Indeed, it is pretty clear they have been, at least in terms of legalese. The validity of any non-disclosure agreement is contingent upon one's chances of pursuing redress through the courts should the terms of the agreement be broken; which in this case would be non existent.

    I am simply seeking to hold Randle to the same standard he so vehemently applies to others. Would you care to venture an opinion as to the tone of Randle's take on all this were he on the outside looking in? I suspect it would be less than complimentary.

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Friday, May 24, 2013  

  • Yes, Ross...

    One could try to hold their feet to the fire, but the current brouhaha derives from a premature outing of the evidence find by me and others.

    The Dream Team -- we all hate that sobriquet -- would prefer to have operated in private or secret.

    But that is not how knowledge should be handled.

    Knowledge and information should be shared and open -- a Wikileaks premise.

    Keeping the new evidence in the hands of a few has produced a stumbling block to its awareness.

    Knowledge in the hands of a few is often lost by various machinations, such as "huxterism" as you note.

    And this has been the problem with the Roswell story since 1978.

    I agree that there is (a lot?) some hubris involved.

    Everyone in the UFO community wants or needs attention.

    The Dream Team also.

    But I think Kevin Randle's real motivation is to undo the wrongs he and others have committed in the long saga of Roswell.

    The Dream Team is a kind of mea culpa.

    So I am inclined to give Kevin and his fellow travelers much leeway in their badly named enterprise.

    As for those non-disclosures someone says they signed, I assume it was a contingency of the fellow who holds the evidence.

    The guy is not the rightful owner, but he has possession of the goods, for some reason, not known to me.

    And I think he wishes to capitalize upon that possession.

    The DT is being or has been snookered by the guy's mercenary inclinations.

    He out-huckstered them so far.

    It's a Dream Team, after all.

    Not a brilliant raft of lawyers or UFO researchers; just a group of mokes hoping to clear up the Roswell mess that they are partly responsible for.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, May 24, 2013  

  • RRRGroup,


    If the custodian of this material is as entirely money motivated as seems to be the case, what's to stop some nice guys for the government offering him enough to sate his avarice, secure his silence and the evidence?

    Decisive as this evidence may possibly be, I suspect it will not see the light of day in a sufficiently unadulterated form to be taken serious; that's assuming it is ever publicly released.

    This mea culpa could become a recriminatory tui cupla.

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Saturday, May 25, 2013  

  • Ross,

    I am hopeful that our back-and-forth and others will bring forth some explanations and details from those in the know.

    The cat is out of the bag, as they say, so maybe this will provoke a cleansing of rumor(s).

    We'll see....

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, May 25, 2013  

  • You remarked earlier that this was "higher calculus". Really? I have looked in some of my old school/college textbooks and have not seen any mention of these Roswell photos.

    Have I missed something or was it deliberately omitted from these books because of threats from the US military?

    By Blogger cda, at Saturday, May 25, 2013  

  • CDA:

    You are right, there is no mention in the books I have on Aztec or Roswell either.

    But I think they are in Scott Ramsey's recent book on Aztec or in some postings at Frank Warren's site The UFO Chronicles.

    Alice Scully, Frank's wife has seen or has some photos.

    Scully, in his book, writes that the Air Force has film. [Page 43]

    I received a personal message that states Mrs. Scully has possession of some photos.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, May 25, 2013  

  • So is Rudiack's continued argument in opposition of the Mogul explanation now somewhat half-hearted?

    Moreover, the captcha data I have gathered which unequivocally supports the word 'VICTIMS' in the Ramey memo, is now to be considered in a ET context? I had considered it frustratingly inconclusive on the basis that the 'VICTIMS' could well have been military personnel.

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Saturday, May 25, 2013  

  • Ross:

    Dream Team member Tony Bragalia, one of our colleagues, believes there were to incidents near Roswell,

    Mac Brazel picked up debris from the alleged "saucer crash" in the Foster Ranch area.

    I believe Brazel picked up balloon debris and I put a document online here a few weeks back supporting that conjecture.

    Brazel's debris didn't have to be Mogul debris, but may have contained some. Two balloon mishaps are easier to digest than two "saucer crashes."

    And I think Nick Redfern might agree with me that Ramey's memo could contain "victims" but not of an unearthly kind.

    When one reads Scully, they get a graphic picture of an extraterrestrial "landing" and saucer/body recovery.

    I contend that Scully's story derives from Roswell and not Aztec, because too many of the minute details dovetail with what we know from pristine Roswell information.

    We are immersed in either an ET event (at Roswell or Aztec), a prosaic military accident, or a botched up mythology which keeps accruing material from faulty memories and/or outright confabulations.

    Roswell is so screwed up with extraneous detritus, Nick Redfern believes, and I have to agree with him, that we will never really know what exactly happened that created the Roswell incident.

    (I think Paul Kimball also takes the position.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, May 25, 2013  

  • RRRGroup,

    Is it correct that the photographic evidence consists of at least one picture taken within spitting distance of the crash site?

    By Blogger Ross Evans, at Sunday, May 26, 2013  

  • Ross:

    No.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, May 26, 2013  

  • Anyone there who knows how look like the photo? My english isnt very good...i mean what can be seen on the photo. I hope that is correct because i use Google to translate.

    Maybe Kevin Randle know whats on the photo...?!

    Hmmm...i cant wait...i want wanna see the photo, now!

    Anyone there who can write to Kevind Randle and say him that we want to see the photo?

    By Blogger Michael Mu, at Monday, May 27, 2013  

  • Michael, Ross, et al.

    If a release isn't forthcoming soon, I'll tell you what I know the alleged new evidence to be.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 27, 2013  

  • Didn't you sign the non-disclosure agreement? Do you know what the penalties are for disclosing something that shouldn't be disclosed? I sincerely hope so.

    Kevin is busy on another book, isn't he? So presumably he has no time to disclose anything just now.

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, May 27, 2013  

  • CDA:

    Why would I sign a non-disclosure?

    I'm not part of the Dream Team.

    And I'm a kind of Wilileaks advocate -- there should be no secrets among friends.

    And where did the non-disclosure information come from in the first place? Kevin's blog?

    Kevin won't disclose anything without a tacit okay from his team members I think.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 27, 2013  

  • Isn't ufology amazing?
    First we get Dream team members signing a non-disclosure agreement. (At least this is what we are told).
    This means that whatever knowledge they now possess, they ain't telling anyone else, not for a while yet.

    But just recently we have another band calling themselves the Disclosure Group. These people are demanding the US authorities disclose the great truth (about ET presence)! If they don't, some other nation will get in first and do so.

    My question is: who, if anyone, is going to disclose the great news? Is the news really that great, and is the news the Dream team possesses the same as that possessed by the US govt?

    By Blogger cda, at Tuesday, May 28, 2013  

  • And I have been asked, CDA, to NOT divulge what I know....which isn't a lot, but seems to be worrisome to those who do have "important" information.

    I'm from media. When news happens, someone breaks it, as fast as they can.

    That's the competitive news business.

    Journalists and news operations are duty bound to let the public know when a story occurs.

    Despite the prohibitions of "National Security," Wikileaks even goes further, providing secrets that maybe should be held in abeyance so as not to cause harm to innocents.

    In the UFO, there are no secrets, or shouldn't be, that we who follow the topic should be shielded from or prevented from knowing.

    But UFO people like those in other areas of activity, like to feel important.

    Holding information tightly let's them have that feeling.

    The Disclosure Group is trying to dislodge what hey think the government has in the way of ET evidence or proof.

    The Roswell Dream Team has access to proprietary information -- stuff I'm calling "evidence" -- and have painted themselves into a corner, if they, indeed, signed non-disclosure agreements.

    I am only beholden to friendship, so I can, at some point, tell what I know, if I think it's important enough to rattle that friendship.

    At this point, it isn't.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, May 28, 2013  

  • Well, to be exact, it is one of several revelations that will be made before and at the presentation on May 5th. Some very new and exciting things...

    AJB

    By Blogger Anthony Bragalia, at Thursday, March 12, 2015  

Post a Comment

<< Home