Archive for the ‘Roswell’ Category
After watching this past week’s Animal Planet show, “Uncovering Aliens,” I’m still without an answer — other than ratings.
At any rate, I watched to see my friend Derrel Sims. It was fun to see him on TV. But I confess I had to roll my eyes in several places. Two come to mind and, for me, tells me that this was a show for newbies by newbies.
In the second half of the show viewers were introduced to Dr. Bob Wood, the person most well known in ufology for the “Majestic Documents.” Bob’s a nice guy, and readers here will know I think very little of the documents (I had a dozen or so linguistically tested for authorship authenticity – they failed miserably), but this segment was awful. A couple of the show “experts” acted (I hope it was acting) like they were new information. Frankly, if you don’t know about the Majestic Documents, you’re no expert and shouldn’t be on a TV about UFOs.
Here’s the point: If you think the Majestic Documents are good evidence for ET contact, you’ve been played like a fiddle.
The Majestic Documents have a VERY checkered history. That’s putting it nicely. They are the product of several layers of deliberate misdirection and disinformation. That isn’t my opinion. It’s the opinion of mainstream UFO researchers. Back in 2007, the MUFON Journal (MUFON = the Mutual UFO Network) devoted 70 pages to a lengthy “state of the question” article on the Majestic Documents. It ain’t pretty. If you want to be informed (and not just parrot UFO blather) you’ll read the article.
The other issue was the oft-repeated myth about how ETs gave us semi-conductors and the transistor. This is bunk. Igor Witkowski’s fascinating book,¬† The Truth About The Wunderwaffe, has a scanned image of a 1947 British Intelligence Report entitled, “German Research on Rectifiers and Semi-Conductors” on page 228. The same page has another British Intelligence report on German work on quartz crystals. There’s also a 1994 article (I’m sure there are others) by Lillian Hoddeson on this technology entitled, “Research on crystal rectifiers during World War II and the invention of the transistor” (History and Technology: An International Journal
Volume 11, Issue 2, 1994).
Here’s the point: The trail leading to the semi-conductor and the transistor is well known. We don’t need aliens at Roswell for it.
Someone better tell Animal Planet. (Like they’d listen).
Anyone familiar with the Roswell incident knows the name Jesse Marcel. Major Marcel was the first officer on the scene of the crash – he was the guy who filled his trunk with crash debris and took it home before taking it to the base. Stanton Friedman’s interview with him ignited the modern Roswell mythic narrative. While the debris was at his home, his son, Jesse, Jr. got to touch it, an experience that has since become the stuff of legend.
The younger Marcel died of a heart attack on August 24. He was 77.
Thoughts on Jesse Marcel, Jr.’s passing have started to appear online. I thought readers might be interested in reading some of them.
I’ve lost track of how many times the USAF has explained what happened at Roswell. First there was the 1994-1995 War-and-Peace-like, 1000-page tome, “The Roswell Report: Fact versus Fiction in the New Mexico Desert.” †This was the report connecting the Roswell crash with Project MOGUL. That was dutifully followed in 1997 by the overbearingly-titled, “The Roswell Report: Case Closed.” This report was released in conjunction with the 50th anniversary of the Roswell event. The CNN press conference from Roswell was what turned my interest in UFOs from that of casual enthusiast to something more academically serious. I can well remember how the USAF spokesman (Colonel Haynes), when confronted by a reporter who knew that the USAF test dummies could not explain the reports of bodies in a 1947 event because the dummies only came into use in the 1950s, stated with a straight face that the USAF believed the witnesses had undergone “time compression.” Here’s a transcript of a Larry King show that utilized video clips from the press conference where Haynes uttered this infamous piece of gobbledy-gook.
These more “official” explanations were in turn followed by Lt. Col. Philip Corso’s controversial book, The Day After Roswell. Corso’s credentials and identity are genuine. He claimed to have been in charge of the seeding of alien technology discovered at Roswell into the private sector for development (most notably Bell Labs). Corso’s book has been criticized, even by some UFO researchers otherwise committed to the ET view of Roswell (most notably Stanton Friedman). The fact that Corso’s son is a professing Christian who believes his father didn’t lie in this matter is an interesting footnote to the saga (but then again he claims the Roswell craft was a time machine).
So now we get another explanation from yet another USAF insider. I’m sure this one will put it all to rest. Personally, I still think the books by Nick Redfern and Joseph Farrell on the Paperclip connections make much better sense.1
- I have reviewed Redfern’s book here. Farrell’s book was preceded by two earlier volumes (here and here) on Nazi experimental wingless flight technology. Readers should note that while I think Farrell has done an amazing job of ferreting out documentary evidence and constructing a strong circumstantial case for man-made UFOs, I don’t follow his thinking on things like the great pyramid and technology in antiquity. ↩
For those who have not read Nick Redfern’s book, Body Snatchers in the Desert: The Horrible Truth at the Heart of the Roswell Story, shame on you … but now you can catch up a bit very quickly. Nick just posted a summary of the timeline that underlies the major points of his contention, that the event at Roswell was very human, and inhumane, hence the cover-up. (Note: I reviewed Nick’s book on this blog).
The Magonia review of books posted a review today of Annie Jacobsen’s book, Area 51: An Uncensored History of America’s Top Secret Military Base (Orion Books, 2012). I haven’t read this one and don’t plan to. It really doesn’t capture my interest, for several of the reasons indicated in the Magonia review. There’s nothing revelatory that can be verified (it’s hearsay stuff), so I don’t see the point of spending the time reading it. I’m just not interested in hearsay. But some of you may be interested in this review.