UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > May > May 2

Re: Just A Few Roswell Questions - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil.nul>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 16:44:38 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 12:02:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Just A Few Roswell Questions - Morris

>From: Gildas Bourdais <bourdais.gildas.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 17:38:34 +0200
>Subject: Re: Just A Few Roswell Questions


>Neil, and Steven

>I am answering you, Neil, and Steven Keaser.

>Please, let's try to stick to clear facts.

Of course.

>First, we have a message of James Bond Johnson, passed on UFO
>Updates on June 1st, 1998, under the title "Examination of
>Roswell Photos Clears the Air Force" . It refers to a Press
>release of May 31, by Ronald Regehr, "Director, Research and
>Investigations, for Mufon, Orange County, California.

>Bond Johnson announces the release by Regehr of a new digital
>enlargement, with this comment:

>"He had made the digital enlargement using latest technology,
>directly from new enlargements obtained from the original
>negatives of the photos, now housed in the Special Collections
>Section of the Main Library at the Universitiy of Texas at

I believe these were aprox 3 or 4 enlargements made from a new
16x12 print of the RameyDubose image obtained from the UTA by
Ron Regehr

>"Nothing has prepared me to begin to try to read these strange
>symbols that are displayed prominently all along some of the
>beams in my photos of General Ramey... It is most impressive
>that, aided by this advanced digital technology, we finally have
>the capacity to enlarge details of the wreckage to see clearly
>what is indeed some kind of "writings" that do not appear to be
>any known writings by any earth residents" (Etc.)

>Then , we have the second "bombshell" of Bond Johnson, in a
>message of June 15 to UFO Updates, transmitted by Stig Agermose,
>entitled "Jesse Jr, Again Sees Symbols From Roswell Crash". In
>it, Johnson writes:

>"Now he was seeing them remarkably being painted across his
>computer screen " (etc.)

>And he quoted Jesse Marcel Jr as saying:

>"I am sure that some of the material in the photos is the real
>stuff - maybe it all is". Jesse said as he looked closely at
>the details... " (etc.)

For the record I believe it was only around mid-late June 89
that I had my first contacts with Bond and got hold of some of
these first scans. It was only late Aug 89 when I obtained my
set of prints of the FW images from the UTA and it took from
Sept thro to Dec 89 to make my own working set of digitisations
of them. Since them I've also further obtained full scans of the
4 original UTA negatives to work with.

I believe the "symbols" he refers to above were those to be
found on a mangled beam in the RameyDubose image.

These symbols _do not_ resemble those seen by Jesse Jnr in any
way, so I'm not at all surprised at his comments,

I'm not even aware if Jesse Jnr has ever seen the symbol from
the RameyAlone image we are discussing.

>The next day, Stig Agermose passes a message of Michael
>Lindemann, from CNI News, entitled "Jesse Jr. Dissociates
>Humself From Johnson".

>Lindemann writes:

>"I've told James Bond Johnson in no uncertain terms that this
>story of his is plain wrong. It's misleading at least, deceptive
>at worst. Jesse Marcel has emphatically denied seeing anything
>in the photos except weather balloon material. I've been in
>repeated touch with Marcel over the last couple of days and I
>have his written statement. Marcel specifically does not see
>anything like the symbols he remembers seeing back in 1947. It
>is very disappointing that Johnsonn has, in effect put words in
>Marcel's mouth". Johnson must retract his story".

>Well, I'm afraid Bond Johnson never retracted his story!

Bond was nothing if not "enthusiastic", sometimes he was a
little too enthusiastic.<G>

You had to remember one of his majors was journalism and he had
been a PIO early on in his Army career<g>.

>Being myself in contact with Marcel Jr, I asked him to confirm
>Lindemann's statement, and he did so, without any ambiguity.
>Regarding the scans provided by Stan Friedman, I have them and I
>have not seen any symbol either. Are they different scans than
>those provided by Ron Regehr, and/or Neil Mossis, I don't really
>know, but they are, indeed, of high definition.

If you've been looking at Stan's scan of the RameyDubose image
I'm not surprised you havn't seen the symbol I refer to, as it's
_not_ in that image. It's to be found in the _RameyAlone_ image,
and can be clearly seen on the "balloon envelope" debris at the
back of the picture _without_ any enhamcement _if_ you have a
large format print, you can certainly see it in my 14 x11, even
better with the help of a small lens.

I can post a URL to an image to illustrate where to look if you

>Now, the deciphering of General Ramey's memo is an entirely
>different debate. Yes, you can see the lines and try to read
>them. Great efforts have been made with very interestting
>results. Perhaps David Rudiak and Brad Sparks would like to
>refresh our memories about that?


You can clearly see the "tram-lines" in the "glyph panel"
sitting smack diagonally across a so called "ML307 foil-paper
panel" but most people dismiss this even though it plainly is
there and is absolutely no part of any ML307 construction as
confirmed in contemporary photos nor can be identified with any
item in the original plans, and if that's the case it cannot be
taken as an item of ML307 debris.

People tend to see what they want to see with the debris, they
see sticks, they see foil, to them this confirms its balloon
and radar target debris. But this answer does _not_ encompass
_all_ the debris and in particular that which shouldn't be there
if it were just balloon and radar target debris ie, things like
the "glyph panel", buttons, pipes and wires on the "balloon
envelope", non rubber like envelope material, folded heavy guage
metal and the enigmatic "thick debris" to found in the Bettman

_If_ the debris is from an ML307 what part do these play?, and
why arn't they shown on the engineering drawings? and why don't
we see them in contemporary photos like those taken on the 9th
of July demo launch at FWAAF and printed in the 10th July
edition of the FW Star Telegram?. I have been asking this same
question since 1989/90 and I'm still waiting to get a credible
answer from the people who see only balloon and radar target

Best Regards


Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com