UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > May > May 23

Re: Just A Few Roswell Questions - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 16:24:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 08:37:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Just A Few Roswell Questions - Gehrman

>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 11:31:59 EDT
>Subject: Re: Just A Few Roswell Questions



>So, no, this doesn't help, other than supply a different version
>to the already confused record. I think we can say, safely, that
>Johnson was out there and he took pictures. I believe that he
>took six, but others with some rather flakey analysis, seem to
>believe he took only four...

"Flakey analysis"? Both Neil and Andrew have used scientific
methods to arrive at their conclusions. If you have a problem
with their results, you need to make it clear in a scientific
way or you can just say "I believe David, and David thinks it's
BS so I'll call it 'flakey'." I think you can do better than
that. You have a responsibility to your readers to at least make
an attempt to understand Neil's evidence and comment
intelligently. "Flakey" is a crude and unintelligent judgement.

>so now we need a third cameraman

Yes, we do.

>take two pictures of Marcel... not to mention the guy who took
>the picture of Newton.

Yes that is correct.

>I think we can safely say that the debris
>in all the pictures is the same,

No you better take a closer look. Examine the Bettmann.
If you don't have it, I'm sure Neil can send it to you.

>though the angles of the
>photographs change and some of the debris is moved around as
>people handled it.

Parts of the debris have been hidden or rearranged for no
apparrent reason.

>Johnson's legacy is a confusion about what he saw and did
>because he offered so many versions of it. When we reduce this
>to the known facts as opposed to the speculations, we have
>Johnson photographing a balloon and target with the cover story
>already in place.

Well yes, the cover story had been in place since the Army
Intelligence decided on these tactics: bait and switch. It was a
drama concocted to deceive the public. But for some reason they
left some of the debris in Bond's photos and it's there for all
to see who care to examine the evidence. Maybe they thought we
were too dumb to realize the difference.

>We have no "real" debris in those pictures

Yes we do see real debris, but that's not the only question. We
must also decide if the radar reflector is a ML306 or an ML 307.
They were not the same in design or construction and so had
different parts. I'm putting my money on an ML306.

That rules out Mogul. So you might begin to realize how
important our disagreements could become. I think everyone on
the list should follow our discussions carefully.

>and an explanation handed out to the press as quickly as

Whatever that means.


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