Concrete slab/Aztec question

[Creepy Green Light]

I know the Aztec UFO crash is a hoax. But I was wondering if anybody has an explanation of what the concrete slab is out in the middle of nowhere that was found? I've always been curious and it bugs me that it exists and nobody seems to know why.

Thanks

 

[Mulvaney]

I've seen the slab - who can resist a side trip to a genuine flying saucer crash site (according to the plaque)?

I don't enough about concrete and rebar to know how accurate the attempts have been to determine its age or to link it to the time frame Aztec was alleged to have happened. Is it any more accurate than dating Kodachrome?

As one who hikes a fair amount, often off trail, I have seen a fair number of slabs in both probable and improbable locations. I don't think it's possible to determine its use at this point - when was it laid, what was the land used for, what were the roads like, who is there who could possibly remember? It seems more probable to think it was used by a rancher or oil than it was as part of a crash retrieval. Some think it might have been a natural gas well plug.

Still, it gave me something fun to track down at the site - in addition to the plaque, the alien head rocks, and a geocache. But as far as artifacts go, I think the rusty cans found at the alleged Kingman crash site are more interesting. Ultimately, though, any such "evidence" only shows that somebody was there doing something and does not get us very far.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

I've seen the slab - who can resist a side trip to a genuine flying saucer crash site (according to the plaque)?

I don't enough about concrete and rebar to know how accurate the attempts have been to determine its age or to link it to the time frame Aztec was alleged to have happened. Is it any more accurate than dating Kodachrome?

As one who hikes a fair amount, often off trail, I have seen a fair number of slabs in both probable and improbable locations. I don't think it's possible to determine its use at this point - when was it laid, what was the land used for, what were the roads like, who is there who could possibly remember? It seems more probable to think it was used by a rancher or oil than it was as part of a crash retrieval. Some think it might have been a natural gas well plug.

Still, it gave me something fun to track down at the site - in addition to the plaque, the alien head rocks, and a geocache. But as far as artifacts go, I think the rusty cans found at the alleged Kingman crash site are more interesting. Ultimately, though, any such "evidence" only shows that somebody was there doing something and does not get us very far.

That's pretty cool that you've seen it in person. How far from any civilization is it? There was a geocache there? Cool. I haven't heard anything about those in about 7 years. I don't know anything about cans at the Kingman site. I'll have to check it out.

 

[Mulvaney]

The Aztec site is only a short (a few miles) detour from the main highway - a gravel road that is in good condition and a short walk. Of course my gps routed us on a gravel road that was not in good condition. There is an Alien Run mountain bike path that also goes right by it. It is (now) listed as a Roadside America site thanks to my tip.

Harry Drew has been one of the main proponents of the Kingman crash and found the cans. A few years ago, I went to a conference to hear Chris and Drew spoke there as well. Unfortunately, so did Sean David Morton and a few other equally well regarded people, but that is another story.

 

[Paul Kimball]

I know the Aztec UFO crash is a hoax. But I was wondering if anybody has an explanation of what the concrete slab is out in the middle of nowhere that was found? I've always been curious and it bugs me that it exists and nobody seems to know why.

Thanks

When I filmed the Aztec: 1948 documentary in 2004 (!) Scott Ramsey swore that they were going to "test" the slab from a core sample they had drilled to see how old it was. Such testing, he assured me, was imminent. Leaving aside just how ridiculous that is as a proposition to begin with, here we are 11 years later... and still no "test" results - even though Scott published a book and hit the podcast circuit to proclaim that Aztec was a real UFO crash and he had the evidence to prove it.

That's ufology.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Last time I talked with Ramsey, he said he would update his book with new material.

Never happened.

This case is, to us, yesterday's news.

 

[SRL+]

Of course, testing the slab would immediately determine what type of thrust, (if any), the concrete could withstand. Additionally, simply running a metal detector over the slab would determine the placement of rebar, (if any), was used. This is so dumb, it’s simply unbelievable. Almost as insane as the alleged traveling Baptist ministers who gave last rites over those poor critters. And just to think the Ramsey’s spent over a half mill and sold a couple of books.

Yesterday's news.., I hope so.

 

[Han]

When I filmed the Aztec: 1948 documentary in 2004 (!) Scott Ramsey swore that they were going to "test" the slab from a core sample they had drilled to see how old it was. Such testing, he assured me, was imminent. Leaving aside just how ridiculous that is as a proposition to begin with, here we are 11 years later... and still no "test" results - even though Scott published a book and hit the podcast circuit to proclaim that Aztec was a real UFO crash and he had the evidence to prove it.

That's ufology.

What I am about to write is just speculation: but I think it could in theory be possible to find out some things about when and how the concrete slab was made.
For example I wonder if concrete recipes have changed over time? and my understanding is that are different recipes for different jobs e.g cement that is designed to withstand high heat or cold and high levels of moisture.

It may also be possible to determine if the concrete was mixed all at once or in smaller loads.
I imagine if there are no proper roads leading to the site then getting a large cement truck to the location would be very difficult.
I also understand that depending on the purpose of the concrete, "hardcore" (pebbles and small rocks) is sometimes added to the mixture to make the concrete go further and save money.
I reckon that there must be a person or institution that could answer all these questions.
The fact that such testing has not been carried out is highly suspect, and I also believe you would need more than one core sample.

 

[SRL+]

The military has in place strict protocols for the construction of launch platforms from all eras. Cross referencing the composition of the so-called pad with military standards of that time would provide all the information necessary in determining any weight or thrust the so-called pad could possibly withstand. Concrete never fully cures, and becomes stronger with age. There are pressure testing devices that measure the strength of concrete. Implementing such a device using a core sample would quickly determine what pressure the sample could withstand. It’s not rocket science and would probably end up costing a couple grand. Take rebar for instance. Cooling towers for nuclear power plants, as well as bank vaults, and city sidewalks, have a protocol for the placement of rebar. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the word, rebar is a rounded metal bar placed in concrete pours that aid in reinforcing the concrete when cured. The military has extremely strict standards for the placement of this reinforcing metal in launch platforms. Once again, scanning over the alleged pad using a metal detector, ($200?), would most likely give an indication of the possible use of rebar and the placement/spacing of it. If the pattern of the placement/spacing of rebar doesn’t match military standards for that era, then it isn’t a launch platform, other than for bottle rockets.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

When I filmed the Aztec: 1948 documentary in 2004 (!) Scott Ramsey swore that they were going to "test" the slab from a core sample they had drilled to see how old it was. Such testing, he assured me, was imminent. Leaving aside just how ridiculous that is as a proposition to begin with, here we are 11 years later... and still no "test" results - even though Scott published a book and hit the podcast circuit to proclaim that Aztec was a real UFO crash and he had the evidence to prove it.

That's ufology.

That's what I figured. Thanks for the heads up Paul

 

[Doug McCrevice]

By the way, I dragged my family to see the site on our way to Durango last summer. I was glad to lay my own actual eyes on something in person which I had heard described many times over the years. I found it interesting, and took lots of photos of the "alien head," with my kids in the center of it etc.

Aztec is a neat little town with an old bridge worthy of a couple of pictures, and a great (and funky) ice cream restaurant. It was a nice diversion from the monotony of a 2-day car trip. It's not for everybody, I suppose, but we had a good time marveling at the bizarre and beautiful rock formations along that road (and past the site. Yes we drove too far at first, but kind of glad we did).