From: Mark Grant (mark@unicorn.com)
Date: Sun Jul 13 1997 - 11:38:29 MDT
On Thu, 10 Jul 1997, Michael Lorrey wrote:
> What was that? The reports of temporal dilation,
When did they make that up? Or are you thinking of DS9?
> unknown materials
> technology, and no discernable power source are all evidently beyond
> 40's technology.
But pretty widespread in 40s SF. In any case, most of those claims weren't
made until the early eighties, by which time they'd moved on to 80s
technology and SF. Hal's already elaborated on this anyway.
> There have been accounts by scientists who claimed to have inspected
> materials at Wright-Patt that the metals were nanoassembled, and that
> the bodies DNA had less than 10% of the amount of genetic info that
> humans have, indicating possible genetic engineering.
Ah, they've moved on to 90s SF. How do they know they were 'nanoassembled'?
Do they have any evidence whatsoever that they were scientists working
there, that these materials exist and that they saw them?
Or is this just more hearsay?
> Uh, Col. Corso, who just came out with a book, was on the recovery crew,
> supposedly,
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Note, supposedly. AFAIK there's no evidence to back any of this up. More
to the point Corso apparently spent twenty years in military intelligence
and has a long-standing grudge against the CIA. He's hardly someone I'd
trust as a source.
> and was with the Joint Cheifs of Staff as well, so the claim
> of no first hand accounts is bogus.
By firsthand accounts I was referring to those who could actually prove
they were there; for example the folks who worked on the Air Force base.
Preferably people writing their own books or articles, rather than
reported interviews, and ideally those who said something less than fifty
years after the supposed incident occured.
> Marcel, Brazel, and the local funeral
> director (who delivered child sized coffins) have all made first hand
> accounts.
I'd have to check up more on that. I've already commented on Marcel in
another message (his testimony seems to support the balloon theory),
according to contemporary news reports Brazel said that the 'flying disc'
was about four feet by six inches (three feet in another report) and
appeared to be made of tinfoil, consistent with the balloon theory. I can't
comment on the funeral director, other than to point out that an Air Force
capable of keeping such a story secret for a third of a century would have
been smart enough to build their own coffins. Amazing how they can be so
smart one moment and so stupid the next, is it not?
> Also, the Mogul balloon theory would fit thescattered materials found at
> the Brazel ranch, if the materials technology problem was not there.
Which materials technology problem? The first-hand accounts don't seem to
show any problem, and the material in the photographs, which Marcel said
*was the material he found at the ranch*, appears to be the material used
to make Mogul radar reflectors. It was also, AFAIR, quite creased and
wrinkled, contradicting the supposed 'indestructible' accounts.
And again, why did supposedly 'indestructible' material break up into
little pieces when the 'disc' crashed? We have a major contradiction here.
> Additionally, vets who worked on that project said that balloon
> materials were not classified, as they were pretty basic stuff, only the
> purpose of the project was classfied. If this was so, why were the
> materials shipped on a priority flight to Wright-Patt under guard?
Because, as far as I can see from the report, they didn't know it was a
Mogul balloon until it was examined at Wright-Patterson, and even if they
did they wouldn't want to leave it lying around for reporters to examine
because they wanted to keep the program secret. Why pass classified
information on to the folks at Roswell rather than ship the balloon out
for examination as quickly as possible.
(And what does he mean by 'balloon materials'? The payload was the
important evidence, not the balloon itself, which AFAIK was just a
standard weather balloon).
> Also, the Mogul theory does not fit the first hand reports of intact,
> damaged wreckage being recovered at another site closer to Roswell, the
> recovery of which by military personnell was witnessed by a number of
> people on a geological or archaeological expedition, several of whom
> have given first hand accounts.
But not until more than a third of a century later, *after* the Roswell
Industry got into full swing and they could make a buck out of it. Odd
that. There are no contemporary reports of wreckage or alien bodies. Not
one. AFAIR there aren't even any first-hand accounts in the 1980 book.
Mark
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Mark Grant M.A., U.L.C. EMAIL: mark@unicorn.com |
|WWW: http://www.unicorn.com/ MAILBOT: bot@unicorn.com |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:35 MST