-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
"The Roswell Dream Team Nightmare"
- Thread starter Christopher O'Brien
- Start date
Free episodes:
Kieran
Paranormal Adept
According to Zamora,
Hardly turned around from car, when heard roar (was not exactly a blast), very loud roar — at that close was real loud. Not like a jet — knows what jets sound like. Started low frequency quickly, then roar rose in frequency (higher tone) and in loudness — from loud to very loud. At same time as roar saw flame. Flame was under the object. Object was starting to go straight up — slowly up. Object slowly rose straight up. Flame was light blue and at bottom was sort of orange color From this angle, saw the side of object (not end, as first noted). Difficult to describe flame. Thought, from roar, it might blow up. Flame might have come from underside of object, at middle, possibly a four feet area — very rough guess. Cannot describe flame further except blue and orange. No smoke, except dust in immediate area.[4]
Flame under the object. Roar from the object. I think he saw a man made object. Who build it don't know
Hardly turned around from car, when heard roar (was not exactly a blast), very loud roar — at that close was real loud. Not like a jet — knows what jets sound like. Started low frequency quickly, then roar rose in frequency (higher tone) and in loudness — from loud to very loud. At same time as roar saw flame. Flame was under the object. Object was starting to go straight up — slowly up. Object slowly rose straight up. Flame was light blue and at bottom was sort of orange color From this angle, saw the side of object (not end, as first noted). Difficult to describe flame. Thought, from roar, it might blow up. Flame might have come from underside of object, at middle, possibly a four feet area — very rough guess. Cannot describe flame further except blue and orange. No smoke, except dust in immediate area.[4]
Flame under the object. Roar from the object. I think he saw a man made object. Who build it don't know
This isn't directed at Kieran specifically, but everyone who thinks this could have been a man-made object. NO man-made aircraft back then, or now, could do what Zamora reported and also account for the physical evidence left behind.
Again, Zamora reported an egg-shaped, WINGLESS object which--by ground impressions--weighed several tons. One estimate, from ground compression, was 8 tons, but it could have been half or a quarter of that and it would make no difference. Think of what it would take to keep an SUV or a Hummer airborne. It would have required a strong downward propulsion just to keep it aloft even after it lifted off. Then it took off cross-country at HIGH SPEED, only about 20 feet off the ground. There was no trail of dust, no trail of smoke, no vapor trail, no nothing. It did this for two miles to the base of the mountains. Zamora told Hynek he thought it took only 10 seconds once it departed. Ray Stanford doubled this to 20 seconds. But you could still call it an entire minute, and that is still 2 miles a minute of 120 mph AVERAGE speed. (If it accelerated smoothly, the peak speed at the base the mountains would have been twice this or 240 mph.) Then Zamora reported it seemed to accelerate even further, rising extremely rapidly up the mountains, so fast he said he could barely follow it by eye, get small very fast, and fade out against the sky in the distance, perhaps 6 miles away in the vicinity of 6-mile canyon.
No VTOL craft then, probably even now, could possibly do this. The lunar landing module, which wasn't yet built (and couldn't operate in Earth gravity), the lander simulators, which still weren't built, the lunar probes like Surveyor, etc., etc., were strictly VTOL craft. The LEM, e.g., had only extremely modest, low-speed sideways capability. Same with the landing simulators, which were often tethered to the ground. None of these craft looked like an egg, ever. None could have carried two men in Earth gravity.
And all these craft, whether using rocket or jet propulsion, are noisy as hell. A key feature of Zamora's report is that once it lifted off, the object very quickly went dead silent (from a high pitched roar to a low one, then silence). Ufology tried to sweep this under the rug by saying Zamora was deafened by the loud takeoff. But he would have literally had to lose all of his hearing, instantly, and after he had put 100-200 feet between the object and himself, then almost instantly recover his hearing, because he was talking over his police radio to the dispatcher only 10 or 20 seconds later calling for backup. So Zamora could talk communicate normally on the lo-fidelity police radio with the dispatcher, but still couldn't hear the roar of a jet or rocket engine in the not-so-far distance. That just can't happen. I don't think any hearing expert would back up this total hearing loss/almost instant recovery scenario.
Finally the Air Force took soil samples of the burn areas, sent them off to a lab, and reported no chemical residues were found. But any operational jet/rocket engine of the time would have left identifiable organic residues behind. Hydrogen/LOX rocket engines were still under development. You couldn't have packed a nuclear engine of the time into such a tiny object, much less provide proper shielding for the crew.
There were other indications of a highly unconventional craft. The Socorro object left an asymmetrical landing impression pattern like a diamond or kite-shape. All VTOL craft like the LEM were symmetrical.
Photos taken only 10 minutes later by one of the Socorro police and turned over to the Air Force were said by Hynek to be fogged by radiation (at least, this is what he said the AF told him). Photos the next morning turned out fine. (Also Geiger counter readings several days later were negative.) Taking Hynek's radiation report at face value, the propulsion unit probably bombarded the ground with high-energy particles (electrons, protons, who knows?), creating short-lived radioactive isotopes. Again, just try to replicate that, then or now, in an SUV-sized object.
Dr. James McDonald later found out from a radiation biology grad student tech from the Univ. of N.M., there the next day taking plant samples, that the soil in the main burn area had been fused into glass. Try doing that in a few seconds with a conventional rocket or jet engine.
You could hypothesize something like a Harrier jet, still under development in Britain. Even ignoring that, it was much larger than the Socorro object, not shaped anything like it, noisy as hell, and would have left organic residues behind. A helicopter also isn't remotely capable of matching the details of the Socorro case. No conventional small plane could land and take off in the arroyo. No balloon could account for this (it would have had to depart into a stiff wind and fly in a straight line hugging the ground for 2 miles at, the bare minimum, 100+mph). Hynek went through all this 50 years ago. No conventional aircraft could possibly explain what landed and took off there. Socorro turned Hynek's head completely around since it defied conventional explanation. The best Hynek could propose was a highly unlikely hoax conspiracy, with everybody in on the hoax--Zamora, back-up Chavez, the Socorro police dept., the FBI agent quickly out there, etc.
The AF desperately tried to account for Socorro by trying to find some project with something like a moon lander. Nobody reported anything remotely like this. Thus you have to believe in an advanced secret craft that we supposedly built, for which there isn't one record for, even 50 years later, that could have replaced our helicopters, jet aircraft, etc., but which we, for inexplicable reasons, we never bothered to deploy. The Navy would have loved something like this--no need for aircraft carriers with their large flight decks. No need for large airstrips for ground bases.
So there is zero evidence that we had the capability to build a craft like this back then or even now. I am not a great believer in these almost magical secret government projects to explain away UFO cases, for which nobody can find any record of, then or now, we never made any use of despite its obvious advanced nature, yet many top-secret government aircraft like Stealth, U-2's, SR-71's, etc. we know a great deal about, often only a short time after development.
DaveM
Paranormal Adept
Dave, what a brilliant thing to say. I'm of the same mind about this crap. Show us some shred of real evidence, or shut up.
Or maybe... Kevin Randle could become the ultimate Roswell BS-revealer, or something... Could the Socorro thread above possibly be split? Enough to talk about here w/o Socorro, thanks...?
The Dream Team is Dead. Long Live the Dream Team. Mr. Randle, please feel free to tell the truth -- you're better at it than anyone gives you credit for.
Rizla, let's also drop this business of 'I have proof positive photos but I can't show them to you.' Give me a break!
Or maybe... Kevin Randle could become the ultimate Roswell BS-revealer, or something... Could the Socorro thread above possibly be split? Enough to talk about here w/o Socorro, thanks...?
The Dream Team is Dead. Long Live the Dream Team. Mr. Randle, please feel free to tell the truth -- you're better at it than anyone gives you credit for.
Rizla, let's also drop this business of 'I have proof positive photos but I can't show them to you.' Give me a break!
In all these demands to publicly reveal the photos, everyone needs to understand that no member of the so-called "Dream Team" has possession of the photos or control over them, whether real or not. Ownership is the present holder of the photos (who even I don't know the identity of). Or as the they say in the legal profession, possession is 90% of the law.
It also makes no sense to release the photos before trying to authenticate them first, if possible. Authentication of the photos as to date is planned by Carey using film experts. (I don't know the current status of this.) Of course, this also requires cooperation from the owner. From what I've heard indirectly, Kodak film edge markings could possibly date the film to 1947, but Kodak repeated these every 20 years, so it could also be 1967. First Kodachrome slide film, from what I've read (I'm no expert here, so please don't hammer me if I have it wrong), was 1938, so it couldn't be 1927, and Kodak stopped dating film this way in 1982, so it couldn't be 1987 or 2007. Thus the most recent possible film stock that would be consistent with a 1947 date would be 1967, which would still be very old film if this was a hoax of recent origin.
It might be possible to chemically date the film through the plastic or emulsion to the 1947 period, in which case the probability of hoax drops considerably. Unless you refrigerate unfixed film and store it in a shielded vault, it will degrade and be fogged by heat and background radiation. This is even more true of color film. A hoax is not so simple as finding 40- or 60-year-old film stock with '47 period consistent edge markings and shooting some pictures of an alien dummy. The film would almost certainly be unusable.
If it turns out these basic tests of authenticity fail (recent slide film not dating to suspected time period), then the game is over. It is a hoax. Every arm-chair critic seems to believe Carey is not aware of the possibility of a hoax. Of course he is. Then he gets criticized for being cautious and doing his due diligence first with pictures he does not physically control. These things take time and money.
I also get rather tired of demands for an alien body or the spacecraft itself, or Roswell supposedly has no basis in fact. That would require totally blowing off the testimony of hundreds of people interviewed, including two or three generals. It would require ignoring the contents of the Ramey memo about Roswell, which I am quite sure speaks of "victims" and the transport of something "in the 'disc'". Besides calling the recovered object a "disc" in this internal memo (not a weather balloon or a radar target or a rawin, even though Ramey starting an hour before was already beginning to publicly put out this change of story), Ramey is speaking of something "IN" the 'disc'. The word "IN" is huge, since radar targets have no insides to them. Why was Ramey writing of something of importance INside a radar target (which at that very moment he was trying to equate to the "flying disc" recovered in the Roswell base release that came out only 2 hours earlier? They were nothing more than flimsy balsa wood kites with sheets of 2-dimensional radar-reflective foil-paper glued and taped between the struts. The foil-paper was no different than what was used to wrap candy bars or chewing gum, hardly exotic stuff.
There were no insides to examine and no reason to further transport one to Wright Field labs for even further inspection, as was done, according to the FBI telegram out of Dallas that day. They were so informed by one of Ramey's intelligence officers that it was nothing but a radar target suspended from a balloon, but still being transported to Wright Field. The telegram then added that they were then informed in a telephone conversation with Wright Field that they did not agree with the assessment they were given by Ramey's man. Radar targets are such simple devices and by then in wide use, so it would be virtually impossible for the experts there to NOT identify one described over the phone.
More information on the FBI telegram: FBI_Telegram
Brigadier General Thomas Dubose (Gen. Ramey's chief of staff in 1947) on the coverup and highly secret transport of Roswell material: Brig. Gen. Thomas Dubose
Brig. General Arthur Exon, former Wright-Patterson commanding officer on Roswell being the crash of spacecraft and a high-level cover-up: Brig. General Arthur E. Exon
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Zero evidence? Really? So I guess you missed the video of the craft I posted here: https://www.theparacast.com/forum/threads/the-roswell-dream-team-nightmare.14058/page-5#post-171089 This most certainly qualifies as evidence that at least one craft that fit most of the description existed. All that was needed is for some lightweight egg shell shaped fuselage to be attached and it would look nearly identical.
I also suppose you are denying that loud roaring and flames shooting out from an object fit the description of rocket or jet engines and that we had the technology for both at the time.
I suppose you're also ignoring the logic that chemical powered craft are hardly what we'd expect from advanced alien technology, along with the science that suggests rocket technology would be the poorest of choices for interstellar travel.
The issue isn't about what you or I want to believe. It's about what is or isn't likely given the circumstances. As mentioned before, the formerly secret programs you mention and we know about, were for craft that went into production and were used on missions for years, so many more people would have been involved and exposed to them. On the other hand a single prototype that never went into service could easily have been chopped into pieces along with all the engineering specifications, parts, and molds, and any documentation relegated to the incinerator. It's not only possible, but we know that's how other projects were handled. Try to be more objective. There is far from "zero evidence". The reality is that there's no conclusive evidence either way, and what evidence there is suggests an exotic but conventional explanation.
Last edited:
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Well to be fair, labeling some researcher or another a "zealot" is bound to cause a knee jerk reaction. That's not to say there aren't those who might fairly be called UFO zealots, such as the Raëlians, but apart from actual UFO religions, I don't think labels like "UFO zealot" apply any more than labels like "rabid skeptic" apply to skeptics who simply reserve judgement pending further evidence. In a sense it's almost comical to think about. I suddenly have this picture in my head of a bunch of foaming at the mouth rabid skeptics battling it out with a horde of white robed UFO zealots in a scene directed by Edgar Wright ( Shaun of The Dead ), while you and I observe the carnage from the sidelines and shake our heads in disbelief. Or am I wrong? Would you be right in there casting saliva covered anti-zealot incantations like, "I hereby invoke Ockham's Razor and slice your petty pilot sighting to shreds, casting it back into the pulp mill from whence it came!"
Last edited:
DaveM
Paranormal Adept
Here is a novel idea... until you have possession or control of these photographs, keep your collective mouths shut! As far as authentication, maybe we should go the Dr. Greer route. Trot out our 'dead alien baby' and let everyone go crazy talking about it. Does anyone really authenticate anything in the UFO field these days?? It seems to me that most UFO researchers these days would run over their competition to get the advantage.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Well ... nothing the least bit inflammatory there
.
DaveM
Paranormal Adept
Well ... nothing the least bit inflammatory there
Inflammatory? I don't think so. Just some common sense that is sadly lacking in the UFO field. The Dr. Greer comment was meant to be facetious. Why do you think talking about UFOs gets such a bad rap? Just look at Royce Myers Hall of Shame if you don't believe me.
Here's a novel idea Dave. Until you know the facts first, maybe YOU should keep your collective mouth shut and not criticize people for the questionable actions of others, over which they have no control.
The fact is "Dream Team" members DID keep their collective mouths shut while trying to do an authentication process. Kevin Randle and I were not part of this process (except for one tiny angle that Tom Carey asked me to look into). Tom Carey and Don Schmitt were in charge of this (primarily Carey, who as I understand it, was contacted by the slide holder originally). Tony Bragalia (again to the best of my knowledge) was also trying to check out some of the back story of where the slides supposedly came from and who might have taken the pictures. (I know almost nothing about what has been discovered.)
Who DIDN'T keep their collective mouths shut were Paul Kimball and Rich Reynolds, who runs the Ufocon blog. Again as I now understand it, Reynolds first got pieces of the story from Nick Redfern, who had been contacted by somebody who knew about the slides (I don't know who, but NOT a DT member). Redfern then passed this on to Reynolds, always looking to stir the pot, who started publishing the rumors from Redfern. Kimball then interviewed Randle for his online radio program, but didn't ask Randle about what Reynolds was talking about. Kimball was then criticized for not asking Randle any questions about this. Kimball emailed Randle, and Randle emailed Kimball with what he knew from his own inquiries (including talking with Redfern). Randle asked Kimball to keep these private emails confidential. Kimball got on his self-righteous high horse when Randle then posted a denial that he was directly involved in the investigation or had ever seen the slides. This was all true, but because Randle did his own side investigation, Kimball declared Randle a liar for saying he didn't investigate. Kimball, after only a month, then broke confidence and published Randle's PRIVATE emails.
(I suppose it could be argued that Randle publicly was being a bit evasive and deliberately ambiguous about the slides because he WAS trying to keep it quiet while they were being investigated, and Kimball chose to interpret this as being disingenuous and a valid reason to break confidence. But Kimball, who was an attorney and Mountie in the past before becoming a film-maker, must have known you don't always tell the public the full story while in a trial or investigating a crime because it can hurt efforts to get at the truth.)
And that's what all the brouhaha is about. There are slides, but we don't know if they were hoaxes or might be authenticated. Slides that did date to the 1947 period would be much more likely to be authentic, since it is near impossible to use many decades old Kodachrome film to create a modern hoax. (Would be all fogged) Some are also trying to figure out exactly how the slides ended up where they did, but this is also extremely difficult given all the elapsed time. Maybe we'll never know the full story, in which case the slides may not prove anything one way or the other.
So everyone on the DT DID try to keep it quiet, but some of the usual publicity seekers and self-promoters in the UFO community always looking for a headline decided to blow the whole thing up for what I consider to be self-aggrandizing reasons. The proper course of action would have been to sit on the information until the background investigation at least leaned clearly one or the author. If film experts declared the film stock to be modern and an attempt to hoax old film, that would have been the end of it right there. But we haven't gotten that far (as far as I know). I can only hope the owner of the slides (whose ID I also don't know, nor does Randle) continues to cooperate and allow further expert examination of the slides for authenticity. But with the nondisclosure agreement deliberately blown by non-DT people, I don't know if he will.
Lou_Sheehan
Paranormal Maven
Good post, drudiak.
DaveM
Paranormal Adept
I must have touched a nerve there Drudiak. You went off for six wordy paragraphs about how you were defamed. I don't recall naming you as the responsible party. If Kimball and Reynolds were the guilty parties, so be it. My point still stands. Until someone has the rights to show these slides everyone should keep quiet.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
DaveM
Paranormal Adept
That seems a bit obvious. Until the public can see these slides or photos, you just have someones opinion to go on. It is irksome when someone says I've got clear evidence of Roswell aliens, but guess what, I can't reveal it to you. More than likely, slides or not, those that believe the Roswell story, will keep on believing and those that don't will keep their same opinion.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
I share your frustration with people who refuse to disclose evidence. If alien visitation is real then information about it should be made available for free, or for as low a cost as possible. That was one of my pet peeves with MUFON. When I first considered joining up with them, I wanted to start cataloging and posting all the best sightings, but at the time, doing so required a paid membership plus a charge for each report, and copying was prohibited. They essentially wanted me to pay them for doing volunteer work for them. Then you've got hold-outs like Stanford, plus all the people who seem to think they have some tidbit they think is the holy grail of ufology ( e.g. the Bob White artifact or Greer's mini alien ) and charge people to see or hear some talk about it.
That being said, this is a discussion forum and people have every right to express their opinions ( including you ). Who knows? Maybe something productive will come out of the discussion whether we have the evidence in hand or not. What we don't know can often be as useful as what we do know. It can provide leads, help educate us on what we should look for in similar evidence, and help to reveal other historical details related to ufology that some people find interesting. Thinking that we should simply not discuss it until we have the evidence reminds me of a Neil de Grasse Tyson comment, "If you don't know then that's where the conversation should end." That's not a supportable position. In fact I think it's exactly the opposite. If you're trying to solve a mystery, then obviously you don't know, and that's where the conversation should begin.
Lou_Sheehan
Paranormal Maven
I listened to the Future Theater interview again. At about 1:31:40, Nick said the only person HE told before the info (such as it was) became public was Tony. Subsequent to Nick's discussion with Tony, some rumors/info appeared (apparently on-line?). Because the rumors/info was not correct, Nick put out a clarifying statement. Nick doesn't think it was Tony who blabbed. Just as conjecture, Nick brought up the possibility that the anonymous person who called Nick also called (communicated with) someone else (perhaps Reynolds or that't how the rumors/info ultimately found its way to Reynolds) and that's how the incorrect rumors/info came out.
iTunes - Podcasts - Inception Radio Network by Inception Radio Network
At:
UFO Hunters Reunion Special
Rizla
Paranormal Maven
Interesting difference between this and the "alien autopsy" film: Everyone is on the internet. No special previews for press clubs. No way to keep everyone who sees these slides from analyzing the hell out of them. I can't see what difference it makes who "blabbed" about what. The information should speak for itself, and if it's what is claimed, it'd have to be incredibly awesome to convince anybody other than the ultimate die-hards.
Another difference: Almost no mass media interest in the "Dream Team" at all, slides or no slides. Fox made a fortune out of the "autopsy" film. Unimaginable today. I tell people about the "Dream Team" meltdown, and they ask, "who?" There's too many real issues going on right now for most people to care about Roswell. Fukushima, a financial system on the brink of total collapse, etc. There had better be more than someone's obscure slides in somebody's attic to make Roswell relevant, for most people, no?
I think that's part of what Dave's trying to say, he's not trying to censor discussion. "Put up or shut up" is completely reasonable here, 'cause thinking human beings have a lot on their plates, and most of them don't give a toss who "Tony" or "Randle" are. (No offense to either, just sayin'...).
I think Roswell lost interest for a lot of people long ago. And I've heard about all those hundreds of witnesses. Where are they? What do they have, other than "stories"? "Stories", without evidence, are exactly what they are.
I'm gonna be in the neighborhood of Dulce next week, if anyone's interested. If I see any saucers flying out of concealed mesa hangers, I'll let you all know, and I won't stash the photos in an attic.
Another difference: Almost no mass media interest in the "Dream Team" at all, slides or no slides. Fox made a fortune out of the "autopsy" film. Unimaginable today. I tell people about the "Dream Team" meltdown, and they ask, "who?" There's too many real issues going on right now for most people to care about Roswell. Fukushima, a financial system on the brink of total collapse, etc. There had better be more than someone's obscure slides in somebody's attic to make Roswell relevant, for most people, no?
I think that's part of what Dave's trying to say, he's not trying to censor discussion. "Put up or shut up" is completely reasonable here, 'cause thinking human beings have a lot on their plates, and most of them don't give a toss who "Tony" or "Randle" are. (No offense to either, just sayin'...).
I think Roswell lost interest for a lot of people long ago. And I've heard about all those hundreds of witnesses. Where are they? What do they have, other than "stories"? "Stories", without evidence, are exactly what they are.
I'm gonna be in the neighborhood of Dulce next week, if anyone's interested. If I see any saucers flying out of concealed mesa hangers, I'll let you all know, and I won't stash the photos in an attic.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
I'm gonna be in the neighborhood of Dulce next week, if anyone's interested. If I see any saucers flying out of concealed mesa hangers, I'll let you all know, and I won't stash the photos in an attic.
It was the mountain not the mesa and according to Valdez the base was closed after a fire in 95 (if I remember correctly.)
Here is a spot on Paul B.s map that was marked "alien base." Something that was there is no longer.
Lat. 36°53'32.26"N Log. 107° 6'31.17"W