Re: Those overpowering but inept aliens

Mark Grant (
Sun, 13 Jul 1997 15:57:25 +0000

On Sat, 12 Jul 1997, Michael Lorrey wrote:

> And the fact that they ignore the "fuselage" of the vehicle that the
> materials came from at a different site a few days later, according to
> witnesses.

And which (AFAIK) was never mentioned until the 1980 book (Berlitz?),
*thirty-three years* after the supposed crash, and even then there were
no first-hand accounts. Yet from the number of supposed 'witnesses' crawling
out of the woodwork most of the population of New Mexico seems to have seen
the crash site, shaken hands with the aliens, bought the T-shirt and taken
souvenirs which miraculously disappeared later on. How come not one of these
people spoke about it to a UFO investigator for over thirty-three years?

And if it really happened and the USAF managed to cover it up for
thirty-three years, how come they came up with such a supposedly lame
cover story? Why would a super-powerful Air Force which could keep an
alien saucer crash secret for a third of a century suddenly turn around
and say that their communication records were destroyed, rather than
creating a bulletproof cover story from scratch? Would that have convinced
any of the saucer-freaks anyway? (note that it's not just the "Roswell
incident" records which are missing, it's most of the records from March
1945 to December 1949 and this was apparently common practice at the time;
how long do you expect the Air Force to keep records about crashed

Note also that Marcel, one of the primary 'witnesses for the prosecution'
was reported in the 1980 book as stating that the photographs showing him
with the debris did in fact show the materials he found at the ranch;
debris which appears to be a 1940s-era radar reflector as used on the
Mogul balloons. So it would seem that either he found a radar reflector or
his testimony is suspect; either way the Roswell myth starts to fall apart
merely on that count.

The evidence from the time supports the balloon theory. Everything else is
merely hearsay more than a third of a century after the fact. There is
*not one piece* of physical evidence for the crash theory, otherwise the
vast majority of us would be convinced.


P.S. Odd, isn't it, that there are so many Roswell believers on a list
which rails against Velikovsky for lack of evidence?

|Mark Grant M.A., U.L.C. EMAIL: |