Jack Brewer's UFO Trail on the Roswell Slides' hacking story

http://ufotrail.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/roswell-slides-saga-involved-email.html

The Roswell Slides: The Alien Autopsy, all over again!

Insightful readers of what’s going on with the so-called Roswell slides can see that the whole thing is heading in the direction of the befouled Alien Autopsy scenario.

We lost our colleague and friend, Anthony Bragalia to the psychosis, and we hope we don’t see others going over the cliff of nonsense that Tom Carey and Don Schmitt are promulgating about the slides and a Roswell connection.

If there is a Roswell provenance, I don’t see it. It may well have been very concealed by Mr. Bragalia in his contacts with me. (He knew I hate secrets…..I’m an Edward Snowden fan and supporter.)

But that said, at this point the Roswell connection seems tenuous.

Nonetheless, with a Cable TV show in the works, it doesn’t bode well for the denouement of the slides story, just as Fox television’s exposé of the Alien Autopsy became a laughing stock in the TV business, from which Fox never recovered.

At any rate, the preemptive announcement by Tom Carey that he had the Roswell “smoking gun” is exactly the kind of hype that has killed ufology and many of the people involved in the study of the UFO phenomenon.

We’re glad that Kevin Randle has distanced himself from the shenanigans. Mr. Randle is on his way back to credibility with his UFO correctives and mild mea culpas.

And I hope Chris Rutkowski is out of the mix too. He’s too legit to be involved no matter how this all turns out.

If the slides turn out to be Roswell-related, I will apologize for my skepticism.

If not, I may say “I told you so.”

We’ll all see, upcoming, supposedly.

RR

Condon, the Commie?

As some of you know, years ago, we attempted to thwart Dr. Condon's leadership of the Blue Book sponsored UFO Committee.

(You can find our documentation at the RRRGroup blog archives or via a Google search.)

This is a supplemental blurb we found that pertains:

Condon is quoted in Walter Sullivan, "3 Aides Selected in Saucer Inquiry," The New York Times, 8 October 1966. See also "An Outspoken Scientist, Edward Uhler Condon," The New York Times, 8 October 1966. Condon, an outgoing, gruff scientist, had earlier become embroiled in a controversy with the House Unamerican Activities Committee that claimed Condon was "one of the weakest links in our atomic security." See also Peebles, Watch the Skies, pp. 169-195. 

RR

Paul Kimball's 2001 interview with Barry Downing: Ufology Unplugged

A link to Paul Kimball's Ufology Unplugged series: His Barry Downing interview from 2001. (Reverend Downing is the author of The Bible and Flying Saucers):

http://youtu.be/YCp5NM-655E

RR

The so-called Roswell slides are back in the news

From Ross Evans:

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=3741410&pid=0&page=1

RR

UFOs and Ufology: The End is Near

Those paying attention can see that the UFO phenomenon has reached a nadir.

When Kevin Randle, and me, and many others are struggling to find relevant, new UFO ideas and material but can’t, UFO buffs have to accept, if they are reasoning individuals, that the thing which interested them, and still does, to some extent, has diminished in relevancy and importance.

We UFO aficionados are, as Bruce Duensing might put it, beating a dead horse.

Scouring the UFO “universe” one is struck by the desperation to find something germane or significant.

YouTubers are loading their spots on the video site with images of flecks or ripples on the moon, and strange configuration in NASA’s Mars rover pictures, not UFOs necessarily, but somehow seemingly related…..at least as they try to portray it.

Bloggers (like us and Mr. Randle) are dredging up old sightings and controversies, begging readers to comment and re-ignite the topic….to no real avail.

The Anomalist is noting many more items of paranormality than items about UFOs.

We, all of us, are providing the dregs of UFO lore, while new “observations” are either created out of whole cloth and anything with a odd shape or cast in the sky has become fodder for a UFO designation.

There are past UFO mysteries to clear up, but that’s grist for the hobbyist, not the public at large, or new, curious UFO mavens, who are a rare breed nowadays.

The once prominent phenomenon (or enigma) is the farthest thing of interest for a culture or society in the midst of turmoil(s) that really count.

I’ll plug along here, acknowledging the futility of my effort, because UFOs provide surcease of my other vibrant concerns and interests that consume the bulk of my day and thinking.

Hang in here, with me, if you like. I’ll still try to invigorate a matter that we all know is on its deathbed, but on life support.

RR

The S-4 Project: The crazy sub-text of Ufology

Here is a link to an aspect of the UFO phenomenon that shows just how convoluted and insane the topic is:

http://www.ufohypotheses.com/s4informers.htm

And when one accesses the link above, Google will accommodate you with a myriad of images that confirm the underbelly (and maybe the overbelly) of the phenomenon is too psychotic to deal with intelligently.

https://www.google.com/search?q=S-4+UFO+project&espv=2&biw=984&bih=588&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=GsliVNrfGcz8yQT484HQBw&ved=0CCQQsAQ

(We confess that we are part of the nonsense, and apologize accordingly.)

RR

Science is almost as flawed as "ufology"

http://metro.co.uk/2014/11/09/hadron-collider-did-not-find-higgs-boson-but-something-else-4941372/

Majestic....in AF files

Over at Kevin Randle's blog is a piece purporting to have found a reference to Majestic, as in Majestic-12.

Mr. Randle uses the find to dismiss the Majic-12 or Majestic-12 documents, and rightfully so.

But there are these references to "majestic" we found also, and could allow for someone to claim that the term refers to the "hoaxed" documents that absorbs some in the UFO community.

I'll give you the reference, and the URL where you can see the reference for yourselves:

Langley is not trying to get rid of ... majestic. On the contrary

http://www.af.mil/News/Features/Display/tabid/273/Article/143741/ospreys-eagles-share-airspace-at-langley.aspx

"That ... will probably last for a very long time," Dauz said. "... there was a ... and ... now, its majestic."

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/485792/philippine-and-us-airmen-renovate-school-in-need.aspx

RR

Entropy and UFOs

The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia [Avon, NY, 1983], Page 269:

In INFORMATION THEORY entropy represents the “noise” or random errors, occurring in the transmission of signals or messages.

Entropy is a sine qua non of UFO reports, as noted here and at UFO Conjecture(s).

Is there some way to eliminate Entropy in the transmission of UFO reports? I don’t think so. The human factors – ineptness, slovenly accumulation of details or facts, cavalier research or investigation – don’t allow, can’t allow a suppression of Entropy.

As the second law of thermodynamics tells us, Entropy is inevitable and consequential.

So what can we do to hold Entropy, or errors and “noise” in UFO reports to a bare minimum?

Check and double-check as journalists are required to do with their reportage.

Yes, errors will occur, but they’ll be held to an insignificant (yet, still unacceptable) number.

For instance, in every UFO report extant, there is always some quibbling detail that is challenged by another quibbling detail, as is the case with the Betty Hill nose description of her alleged alien captors, or in the Roswell tale, the found disc is either a flying saucer or what was titled a flying disc/saucer in the vernacular of the time: something odd or out of the ordinary, an exotic thing.

In general witness testimony, when two or more witnesses provide testimony, there will invariably, be differing accounts. You are all familiar with UFO reports where this is so.

Entropy is the bane of UFO reports and has always been so. Why it is so profound in ufology, more so it seems, than other “disciplines – I’m using the word disciplines loosely here – intrigues.

UFOs create chaos in thinking and observation. Why? Because they are such an odd and out-of-the-ordinary phenomenon or topic.

In the Socorro event – one of my favorite UFO accounts (as you know) – the abused identification of the insignia or symbol seen and drawn by lone witness Police Officer Lonnie Zamora, flummoxes a possible explanation for the incident.

Entropy created, inadvertently and stupidly, by those involved.

Even with a calculated effort to diminish Entropy, Entropy prevails and will prevail.

Any hope of curtailing Entropy is futile of course, but it’s worth a gallant try to overcome this feature of nature, even if we won’t be successful by a long shot.

That’s the suggestion of Mythology: man can overcome the gods and fate by Herculean effort(s).

Are UFO devotees up to the task? They haven’t been so far, and the phenomenon is fading fast, only showing itself in an evanescent manner.

So time is of the essence, as they say.

RR

The 1948 Aztec incident; where it fails in the rendering

Frank Scully's "classic" Behind the Flying Saucers book was an exciting and favorite introduction to extraterrestrial life for many UFO old-timers, since it told of a flying saucer accident near Aztec, New Mexico in 1948 where and when a flying saucer crashed, leaving alien bodies in its destructed wake.

The tale has been badgered about by UFO aficionados and skeptics from its publication in 1950.

(It was used for my first oral book report in high school.)

The book has a patina of authenticity, and encouraged several UFO writers to expand on and research the story, Scott and Suzanne Ramsey are two of those writers, providing lots of time and money toward proving that Aztec "really happened."

The problem is that many things about the tale don't add up.

Paul Kimball [The Other Side of Truth] wrote a piece outlining one particular aspect of the convoluted account that doesn't pass muster.

Click HERE for Paul's carefully prepared rebuttal.

This is how researchers should treat exotic tales of UFOs and flying saucers.

(My guess, as many of you know, is that the rumored 1947 Roswell event, whatever it was, became the incendiary spark that Silas Newton, one of the main characters in Scully's presentation, used to create a scenario that might benefit his oil business.)

RR

A small (?) mistake in UFO reportage

  

Richard Hall: March 14, 1966: Dexter, MI, 3:50 A.M. Flurry of sightings for two and a half hours. Sheriffs reported disc-shaped objects moving at fantastic speeds and making sharp turns, diving and climbing, hovering. Four UFOs in straight-line formation observed at one point. Seifridge AFB confirmed tracking UFOs over Lake Erie at 4:56 A.M. Following is the log of "Complaint No.00967" signed by Cpl. Broderick and Deputy Patterson of the Washtenaw County Sheriff's Department:  3:50 A.M. Received calls from Deputies Bushroe and Foster, car 19, stating that they saw some suspicious objects in the sky, disc, star-like colors, red and green, moving very fast, making sharp turns, having left to right movements, going in a Northwest direction.  4:04 A.M. Livingston County [sheriff's department] called and stated that they also saw the objects, and were sending car to the location.  4:05 A.M. Ypsilanti Police Dept. also called stated that the object was seen at the location of US-12 and I-94 [intersection of a U.S. and an interstate highway].  4:10. A.M. Monroe County [sheriff's department] called and stated that they also saw the objects.  4:20 A.M. Car 19 stated that they just saw four more in the same location moving at a high rate of speed.  4:30 A.M. Colonel Miller [county civil defense director] was called; he stated just to keep an eye on the objects that he did not know what to do, and also check with Willow Run Airport.  4:54 A.M. Car 19 called and stated that two more wcre spotted coming froni the Southeast, over Monroe County. Also that they were side by side.  4:56 A.M. Monroe County [sheriff's department] stated that thcy just spotted the object, and also that they are having calls from citizens. Called Selfridgc Air Base and they stated that they also had some objects [presumably on radar] over Lake Erie and were unable to get any ID from the objects. Thc Air Base called Detroit Operations and were to call this Dept. back as to the disposition.  5:30 A.M. Dep. Patterson and I [Cpl. Broderick] looked out of the office and saw a bright light that appeared to be over the Ypsilanti area. It looked like a star but was moving from North to East.  6:15 A.M. As of this time we have had no confirmation from the Air Base.  Appended to the report is a statement from Washtenaw County deputies B. Bushroe and J. Foster: "This is the strangest thing that [we] have ever witnessed. We would have not believed this story if we hadn't seen it with our own eyes. These objects could move at fantastic speeds, and make very sharp turns, dive and climb, and hover with great maneuverability. We have no idea what these olyjects were, or where they could have come from. At 4:20 A.M. there were four of these objects flying in a line formation, in a north westerly direction, at 5:30 these objects went out of view, and were not seen again."  Deputy Bushroe told the press: "It would swing back and forth like a pendulum, then shoot upward at tremendous speed, hover and then come down just as fast." Dexter police and Livingston County sheriffs, contacted by Bushroe and Foster, "reported that they saw the same ofijects engaging in the same maneuvers.  March 17, 1966: Milan, MI, 4:25 A.M. Sgt. Nuel Schneider and Deputy David Fitzpatrick saw top-shaped objects making sharp maneuvers. They alternately hovered, rose and fell quickly, darted around at jetlike speed, their light dimming and brightening periodically In a report to NICAP the officers stated that two objects were operating together, circling and flying in formation, while a third object hovered at a lower altitude.  March 20, 1966: Dexter, MI. About 8:30 PM. Frank Mannor and family and dozens of other witnesses, reported that a domed oval object with "quilted" or "waffled" surface and lights in the center and on each end had landed in a swampy field. Deputies David Fitzpatrick and Stanley McFadden parked car #34 adjacent to the area and began a search with Frank Mannor.  "While in the woods area," their report states, "a brilliant light was observed from the far edge of the woods, and upon [our] approaching, the light dimmed in brilliance. . . . The brilliant light [then] again appeared, and then disappeared. A continued search of the area was conducted, through swamp and high grass, with negative results. Upon returning to the patrol vehicle, the undersigned officers were informed that one of the objects had been hovering directly over the area where our flashlight beams had been seen, and then [it] departed in a west direction of flight, at high rate of speed."  As he and other officers were rushing to the scene, Officer Robert Hartwcll of the Dexter Police Department saw a luminous object buzz his car. Robert Taylor, Dexter police chief, said he watched an object in the field from Frank Mannor's home on a knoll overlooking the area. it appeared as a pulsating red, glowing object. Through binoculars he saw "a light on each end of the thing."  There were additional sightings on March 21 at Hillsdale College, with Civil Defense Director William Van Horn as one of dozens of witnesses, and March 24 in Ypsilanti, MI.  ----------------------------------------------------  Source: Richard H. Hall, Volume II, The UFO Evidence - A Thirty Year Report, pages 184-186  This account by my friend Richard Hall contains a factual error that may or may not be significant. In the copy above, I've highlighted (bold italics) Mr. Hall's errant comment: "..."and dozens of other witnesses" which is not true. In the 1966 Ann Arbor/Dexter "swamp gas" sightings, only farmer Frank Mannor and his son saw the object, describing it as "quilted." No one else, not Frank Mannor's wife nor any police officers nor any neighbors were present during the UFO observation. That such an inestimable researcher as Richard Hall could make such an egregious mistake baffles, and confirms, for me, that UFO accounts, in their entirety, should be taken with a grain of salt. RR