|
Playing with your mind
 Every day we
are subject to countless news stories, reports,
revelations and visual images to remind us of the reality
of the war on terror. A growing number of people are
beginning to question if we are subject to the objective
reporting of all the facts or if we are sold what the
world’s governments want us to believe. Most people are
resigned to an element of bias in the media but are
techniques such as NLP being used to manipulate our
unconscious thoughts, installing and influencing new
belief systems in the minds of an unsuspecting public?
The CIA has conducted three top-secret mind control
projects since the 1950's, Bluebird, Artichoke and Mkultra.
These projects centred on the use of aggressive techniques
such as electric shock therapy and the use of chemical,
biological and radiological materials to ‘brainwash’
selective individuals. Is it possible that the war on
terror is yet another CIA project, one that this time uses
subtle methodology of NLP to affect confusion,
self-delusion, herd mentality and tyranny amongst
competing ideologies? It’s interesting to ponder that the
CIA has often been accused of having connections with the
birth of Al Qaeda and thus, the 911 attacks.
The
background of NLP: NLP or Neuro-Linguistic Programming has become the
buzzword of the past 30 years since the technique was
formalised by Richard Bandler and John Grinder. NLP is
essentially the study of the structure of subjective
experiences and behavioural programming. It operates on
the assumption that behaviour has a determinable structure
that is developed at an unconscious level and which can be
both modelled and modified. In the right hands, the
benefits of NLP are undeniable, but in the wrong hands. a
tool for self-improvement and behaviour modification can
become a tool for ethically dubious applications such as
mass mind control. Neuro-Linguistic Programming is often
proposed as a study of the way in which the human beings
structure their perceptions, it creates a framework that
can be used to analyse study and reprogram a person’s
behaviour, lifestyle and attitude. As a form of
unconscious and conscious learning, proponents of NLP
state that it allows destructive patterns of behaviour to
be modified and productive ones to be enhanced and that
NLP relies on the voluntary participation of the patient.
On an individual basis, that claim is probably very valid
but if NLP were applied to a population as a whole, then
participation in the exercise would be unconscious, most
of those targeted would have no idea their thoughts and
understanding were being subtly manipulated. In many ways
NLP isn’t really new; it’s an age-old technique that’s
finally been given a name.
The missing link between Politics and Religion
NLP could be considered compatible with any religion or
spiritual context. To all intents and purposes, religion
itself may be nothing more than collective Neuro-Linguistic
Programming, essentially reprogramming the habits and
transforming beliefs and mental associations of its
followers, as the socio-political climate dictates.
Perhaps more than anything, the adoption of the Christian
faith by Rome sealed the relationship between politics and
religion. By doing so, the emperor Constantine the Great
set in motion a system of manipulation and control that
has never been improved upon, in many ways no organisation
puts NLP to better use than religion. The Roman political
agenda was controlled as much through the early Christian
church as it was through its political administration. The
Roman Catholic Church increased and solidified its
dominion throughout Europe with the infamous Inquisition
the 13th Century creating a climate of suspicion and fear
to control society behaviour. Religious cults have long
been accused of ‘brain washing’ their members owing to the
methodology their organisations use, cult leaders often
exuding powerful charisma and unquestionable authority. In
many ways that methodology is no different to that which
the mainstream religions employ; it is simply more direct
and less subtle due to the fact that cults lack the cradle
to the grave membership of the mainstream religions. This
cradle to the grave commitment underlines one of the
assertions of Neuro-Linguistic Programming; that people do
not generally have access to an absolute knowledge of
reality but rather, have access to a set of beliefs that
have been built up over time, it is this belief system
that creates their 'reality'. For thousands of years, the
framework of religious dogma has facilitated the creation
of people’s realities. During the Middle Ages it wasn’t
uncommon for Christians to attend church at least twice a
day. People were obliged to attend frequent services and
taught not to question the authority of the institution.
These services were often used to ensure that both social
and political messages were not only distributed amongst
the masses, but also accepted by them. When we look at the
Muslim faith today, the devout are bound by the same
obligation to attend their mosques on a daily basis where
they are potentially exposed to the same subliminal and
direct programming as any other devout religion or cult.
In Britain, there are moves under foot to deport a number
of so called ‘radical clerics’ from the country in an
effort to stem the propaganda and messages of hate and
intolerance that they allegedly preach.
The Media Machine and the battle for hearts and minds
The media has an unrivalled effect in human thinking and
action using repetitive patterns to affect a form of
social conditioning. Governments have learned how to
utilize television with its 24 hour news stations, radio
and the press as a powerful means of communicating the
socio political messages they want people to hear.
Television works on the conscious and subconscious at the
same time imparting the messages to a receptive audience,
who put their unquestioning faith in the impartiality and
accuracy of television news and current affairs programmes.
These mediums constantly reinforce the culturally defined
micro and macro-patterns of society and the doctrines of
the political regimes that underpin and channel human
behaviours. The media bombardment works on the principal
that most people won't consciously remember many of the
specifics of the reports yet at a subconscious level they
will have created new enegrams and thus new pathways for
the viewer’s thoughts to follow. Significantly, it has
recently emerged that George Bush had planned to order the
bombing of the Al Jazzera TV station as part of his
strategy in addressing the ‘war on terror’. Al Jazeera is
of course the TV station that terrorist organizations,
like Al Qaeda, send video messages to. British Prime
Minister Tony Blair, who despite his personal backing for
Bush, has struggled to win the support of the British
media and thus, the British public talked Bush out of this
idea. When news of the planned bombing of Al Jazzera
leaked out in Britain, the Attorney General there ordered
that the British media, which has never been particularly
supportive of America’s foreign policy, to cease reporting
the story. Although the main stream media were then
obliged to comply with the directive, certain acerbic
members of the British press used it to highlight both
Blair’s pandering to Bush and Bush’s questionable tactics.
One current affairs program went as far as to joke that
this would have been a major tactical flaw on Bush’s part,
for no other reason than Al Jazzera obviously have more of
an idea where Bin Laden is than the hapless Bush does. The
issue of the British media’s support of its government
policy is in stark contrast to its American counterparts.
In Britain, the media has been largely uncooperative in
supporting the government’s policies concerning the war on
terror, particularly in relation to its unfaltering
support of American foreign policy. This lack of media
backing means that the British government has failed to
galvanise public opinion, support for the war on terror
and US foreign policy is lukewarm. Without the support of
the media mass, NLP is an almost impossible trick to pull
off. As has been demonstrated, the media plays a key role
in collective NLP. One of the techniques NLP uses, and the
reason why the media is so crucial to the technique, is
visual triggers. These visual images are used by our
sensory perceptions to create engrams, the neurological
mechanisms through which memory traces are stored in the
brain. These engrams create an anchor for our thought
patterns.
Daily existence and the
'Mind' are treated as systemic processes in the field of
NLP. The processes that take place within a human being,
during their interactions with others and with their
environment are systemic (Bateson 1979). Our bodies, our
societies, and our planet form a complex matrix of
interrelated systems and sub-systems, which interact with
and influence each other. The process of NLP assumes
that looking from different vantage points may result in
quite different and yet equally valid descriptions and
emphasis of what is important in the system. In theory,
this could become a very effective tool that could be used
to engineer conflict on a mass scale, with conflicting
ideologies considering the same set of circumstances very
differently.
The images of the mortally wounded Twin Towers, Bin Laden
and Bush are deeply embedded in the minds of many in the
Middle East although the associations are different where
they are seen as a strike for freedom against an arrogant
and oppressive superpower. Neither associations are
necessarily correct but the new tool of mass NLP, the
media, constantly reinforces the thought patterns of each
culture. Body posture, breathing, gestures towards eyes,
ears or body, eye movements and language patterns are all
elements that are used to trigger the unconscious mind in
NLP. Photographs of Osama Bin Laden commonly circulated by
the media always seem to show his eyes as being an
unusually prominent feature. Likewise, the eye contact
made by newsreaders when we watch their bulletins is
another small but important component of the NLP
technique. Leaders such as Bush and Blair are known to
have incorporated NLP techniques in their public
appearances and speaking, with body language and speech
patterns featuring prominently. The incorporation goals is
another element of NLP, part of these goals may include
changing a state of mind or "re-programming" their own or
somebody else's beliefs. It is clear to see how this
applies to the war on terror, with both sides being sucked
into the reality created by their respective media
machines and both been sold the idea that success lies
with the subjugation of the other’s belief system and
values and by embracing the belief system of their
respective leaders. The differing approaches – might
versus stealth, to what in effect is a media sustained
conflict ensures that neither side can ever really ‘win’.
However, the individual and collective ability to reason
is itself subjugated by the media machine and by the far
right extremists from both sides. It is these far right
extremists that form the basis for the behavioural model
that both governments are attempting to implant in
society. We confidently assume that we have the ability to
discern but the reality is the process of NLP that the
media facilitates ensures that the herd mentality
prevails. We believe that we are thinking for ourselves,
but to some extent this is an illusion. In reality we are
thinking along the lines created by those enegrams that
were so dramatically established on September 11th and a
behavioural model that has been reinforced by the media on
a daily basis since then. Using NLP to win the battle for
the hearts and minds of both the Middle East and the West
has created two influential yet opposing mindsets and two
very different realities, more importantly it has
disempowered people on a global scale the likes of which
has never been seen before. The question is: Will this
exercise in global political propaganda, or one might say
indoctrination, be a unique exercise or will the technique
simply be developed, refined and used again? Source:
Thouthweb.
___________________________________________________________________________
"Alien Autopsy" Hoax
 By
Joe Nickel
The
Roswell crashed-saucer myth has been given renewed impetus
by a controversial television program "Alien
Autopsy: Fact or Fiction?"
that purports to depict the autopsy of a flying saucer
occupant. The "documentary," promoted by a British
marketing agency that formerly handled Walt Disney
products, was aired August 28, and September 4, 1995, on
the Fox television network. Skeptics, as well as many
UFOlogists, quickly branded the film used in the program a
hoax. "The Roswell Incident," as it is known, is described
in several controversial books, including
one of that title
by Charles Berlitz and William L. Moore. Reportedly, in
early July 1947, a flying saucer crashed on the ranch
property of William Brazel near Roswell, New Mexico, and
was subsequently retrieved by the United States government
(Berlitz and Moore 1980). Over the years, numerous rumors,
urban legends, and outright hoaxes have claimed that
saucer wreckage and the remains of its humanoid occupants
were stored at a secret facility -- e.g., a (nonexistent)
"Hangar 18" at Wright Patterson Air Force Base -- and that
the small corpses were autopsied at that or another site (Berlitz
and Moore 1980; Stringfield 1977). [See the SI
Special Report on Roswell by Philip J. Kiass in this
issue.]
UFO
hoaxes, both directly and indirectly related to Roswell,
have since proliferated. For example, a 1949 science
fiction movie,
The Flying Saucer,
produced by Mikel Conrad, purported to contain scenes of a
captured spacecraft; an actor hired by Conrad actually
posed as an FBI agent and swore the claim was true. In
1950, writer Frank Scully reported in his book
Behind the Flying Saucers
that the United States government had in its possession no
fewer than three Venusian spaceships, together with the
bodies of their humanoid occupants. Scully, who was also a
Variety magazine columnist, was fed the story
by two confidence men who had hoped to sell a
petroleum-locating device allegedly based on alien
technology. Other crash-retrieval stories followed, as did
various photographs of space aliens living and dead: one
gruesome photo portrayed the pilot of a small plane, his
aviator's glasses still visible in the picture (Clark
1993). Among recent Roswell hoaxes was the
MJ-12
fiasco, in which supposed top secret government documents
including an alleged briefing paper for President
Eisenhower and an executive order from President Truman
corroborated the Roswell crash.
 Unfortunately,
document experts readily exposed the papers as inept
forgeries (Nickell and Fischer 1990). Sooner or later, a
Roswell "alien autopsy" film was bound to turn up. That
predictability, together with a lack of established
historical record for the bizarre film, is indicative of a
hoax. So is the anonymity of the cameraman. But the
strongest argument against authenticity stems from what
really crashed at Roswell in 1947. According to recently
released Air Force files, the wreckage actually came from
a balloon-borne array of radar reflectors and monitoring
equipment launched as part of the secret
Project Mogul
and intended to monitor acoustic emissions from
anticipated Soviet nuclear tests. In fact, materials from
the device match contemporary descriptions of the debris
(foiled paper, sticks, and tape) given by rancher Brazel's
children and others (Berlitz and Moore 1980; Thomas 1995).
Interestingly, the film failed to agree with earlier
purported eyewitness testimony about the alleged autopsy.
For example, multiple medical informants described the
Roswell creatures as lacking ears and having only four
fingers with no thumb (Berlitz and Moore 1980), whereas
the autopsy film depicts a creature with small ears and
five fingers in addition to a thumb. Ergo, either the
previous informants are hoaxers, or the film is a hoax, or
both. Although the film was supposedly authenticated by
Kodak, only the leader tape and a single frame were
submitted for examination, not the entire footage. In
fact, a Kodak spokesman told the Sunday Times of London:
"There is no way I could authenticate this. I saw an image
on the print. Sure it could be old film, but it doesn't
mean it is what the aliens were filmed on." Various
objections to the film's authenticity came from
journalists, UFO researchers, and scientists who viewed
the film. They noted that it bore a bogus, non-military
codemark ("Restricted access, AO I classification") that
disappeared after it was criticized; that the anonymous
photographer's alleged military status had not been
verified; and that the injuries sustained by the
extraterrestrial were inconsistent with an air crash. On
the basis of such objections, an article in the
Sunday Times of London advised: "RELAX. The little
green men have not landed. A much-hyped film purporting to
prove that aliens had arrived on earth is a hoax"
(Chittenden 1995). Similar opinions on the film came even
from prominent Roswell-crash partisans: Kent Jeffrey, an
associate of the Center for UFO Studies and author of the
"Roswell Declaration" (a call for an executive order to
declassify any United States government information on
UFOs and alien intelligence) stated "up front and
unequivocally there is no (zero!!!) doubt in my mind that
this film is a fraud" (1995). Even arch Roswell promoter
Stanton T. Friedman said: "I saw nothing to indicate the
footage came from the Roswell incident, or any other UFO
incident for that matter" ("Alien or Fake?" 1995). Still
other critics found many inconsistencies and suspicious
elements in the alleged autopsy. For example, in one scene
the "doctors" wore white, hooded anti-contamination suits
that could have been neither for protection from radiation
(elsewhere the personnel are examining an alien body
without such suits), nor for protection from the odor of
decay nor from unknown bacteria or viruses (either would
have required some type of breathing apparatus). Thus it
appears that the outfits served no purpose except to
conceal the "doctors"' identities. American pathologists
offered still more negative observations. Cyril Wecht,
former president of the National Association of Forensic
Pathologists, seemed credulous but described the viscera
in terms that might apply to supermarket meat scraps and
sponges: "I cannot relate these structures to abdominal
contexts." Again, he said about contents of the cranial
area being removed: "This is a structure that must be the
brain, if it is a human being. It looks like no brain that
I have ever seen, whether it is a brain filled with a
tumor, a brain that has been radiated, a brain that has
been traumatized and is hemorragic..." (Wecht 1995). Much
more critical was the assessment of nationally known
pathologist Dominick Demaio who described the autopsy on
television's "American Journal" (1995): "1 would say it's
a lot of bull." Houston pathologist Ed Uthman (1995) was
also bothered by the unrealistic viscera, stating: "The
most implausible thing of all is that the 'alien' just had
amorphous lumps of tissue in 'her' body cavities. I cannot
fathom that an alien who had external organs so much like
ours could not have some sort of definitive structural
organs internally." As well, "the prosectors did not make
an attempt to arrange the organs for demonstration for the
camera." Uthman also observed that there was no body
block, a basic piece of equipment used to prop up the
trunk for examination and the head for brain removal. He
also pointed out that "the prosector used scissors like a
tailor, not like a pathologist or surgeon" (pathologists
and surgeons place the middle or ring finger in the bottom
scissors hole and use the forefinger to steady the
scissors near the blades). Uthman further noted that "the
initial cuts in the skin were made a little too
Hollywood-like, too gingerly, like operating on a living
patient" whereas autopsy incisions are made faster and
deeper. Uthman faulted the film for lacking what he aptly
termed "technical verisimilitude." The degree of realism
in the film has been debated, even by those who believe
the film is a hoax. Some, like Kent Jeffrey (1995),
thought the autopsy was done on a specially altered human
corpse. On the other hand, many -- including movie special
effects experts -- believed a dummy had been used. One
suspicious point in that regard was that significant
close-up views of the creature's internal organs were
consistently out of focus ("Alien or Fake?" 1995).
"American Journal" (1995) also featured a special effects
expert [TD. Co note: it was our pal Rick Lazzarini]
who doubted the film's authenticity and demonstrated how
the autopsy "incisions" -- which left a line of "blood" as
the scalpel was drawn across the alien's skin -- could
easily have been faked. (The secret went unexplained but
probably consisted of a tube fastened to the far side of
the blade.) In contrast to the somewhat credulous response
of a Hollywood special effects filmmaker on the Fox
program, British expert Cliff Wallace of Creature
Effects provided the following assessment:
None
of us were of the opinion that we were watching a real
alien autopsy, or an autopsy on a mutated human which
has also been suggested. We all agreed that what we were
seeing was a very good fake body, a large proportion of
which bad been based on a lifecast. Although the nature
of the film obscured many of the things we had hoped to
see, we felt that the general posture and weighting of
the corpse was incorrect for a body in a prone position
and had more in common with a cast that had been taken
in an upright position.
We did
notice evidence of a possible molding seam line down an
arm in one segment of the film but were generally
surprised that there was little other evidence of
seaming which suggests a high degree of workmanship.
We
felt that the filming was done in such a way as to
obscure details rather than highlight them and that many
of the parts of the autopsy that would have been
difficult to fake, for example the folding back of the
chest flaps, were avoided, as was anything but the most
cursory of limb movement. We were also pretty
unconvinced by the lone removal sequence. In our opinion
the insides of the creature did not bear much relation
to the exterior where muscle and bone shapes can be
easily discerned. We all agreed that the filming of the
sequence would require either the use of two separate
bodies, one with chest open, one with chest closed, or
significant redressing of one mortal. Either way the
processes involved are fairly complicated and require a
high level of specialized knowledge.
Another
expert, Trey Stokes -- a Hollywood special effects "motion
designer" whose film credits include The Abyss, The
Blob, Robocop Two, Batman Returns, Gremlins II, Tales from
the Crypt, and many others -- provided an
independent analysis
at CSICOP's request. Interestingly, Stokes's critique also
indicated that the alien figure was a dummy cast in an
upright position. He further noted that it seemed
lightweight and "rubbery," that it therefore moved
unnaturally when handled, especially in one shot in which
"the shoulder and upper arm actually are floating rigidly
above the table surface, rather than sagging back against
it" as would be expected (Stokes 1995). CSICOP staffers
(Executive Director Barry Karr, Skeptical Inquirer
Assistant Editor Tom Genoni, Jr., and I) monitored
developments in the case. Before the film aired, CSICOP
issued a press release, briefly summarizing the evidence
against authenticity and quoting CSICOP Chairman Paul
Kurtz as stating:
The
Roswell myth should be permitted to die a deserved
death. Whether or not we are alone in the universe will
have to be decided on the basis of better evidence than
that provided by the latest bit of Roswell fakery.
Television executives have a responsibility not to
confuse programs designed for entertainment with news
documentaries.
References
-
Alien
or fake? 1995. Sheffield Star (England),
August 18.
-
"American Journal," 1995. September 6.
-
Berlitz, Charles, and William L. Moore. 1980.
The Roswell Incident
New York: Grosset and Dunlap.
-
Chittenden, Maurice. 1995. "Film that 'proves' aliens
visited Earth is a hoax", the Sunday Times
of London, July 30.
-
Clark,
Jerome. 1993. "UFO Hoaxes." In
Encyclopedia of Hoaxes,
ed. by Gordon Stein, pp. 267-278. Detroit: Gale
Research.
-
Jeffrey, Kent. 1995. Bulletin 2: The purported 1947
Roswell film, Internet, May 26.
-
Kurtz,
Paul. 1995. Quoted in CSICOP press release, "Alien
Autopsy: Fact or Fiction?" film a hoax concludes
scientific organization. April 25.
-
Nickell, Joe, and John E Fischer. 1990. The
crashed-saucer forgeries, International UFO
Reporter, March/April 1990, pp.4-12.
-
Stokes, Trey. 1995. Personal communication, August
29-31.
-
Stringfield, Leonard, H. 1977.
Situation Red: The UFO Siege.
Garden City, N.Y.: Douhleday, pp. 84, 177-179.
-
Thomas, Dave. 1995.
The Roswell incident and Project
Mogul,
SKEPTICAL INQUIRER 19(4) (July-August): pp. 15-18.
-
Uthman,
Ld. 1995. "Fox's 'Alien Autopsy': A Pathologist's View,"
Usenet, sci.med.pathology, September 15.
-
Wallace, Cliff 1995. Letter to Union Pictures, August 3,
quoted in Wallace's letter to Graham Birdsall, UFO
Magazine, August 16, quoted on ParaNet, August
22.
-
Wecht,
Cyril. 1995. Quoted on "Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction?"
Fox Network, August 28 and September 4.
About
the Author
Joe Nickell
is Senior Research Fellow at CSICOP. This is his inaugural
Investigative Files
column.
|
|
The Roswell Incident and Project Mogul
By Dave Thomas
A September 1994 Air Force report strongly supported the theory
that the "UFO" debris found by rancher Mac Brazel in 1947 northwest of
Roswell, New Mexico, was in fact a remnant of a balloon flight launched as
part of a top-secret program called Project Mogul. The possible connection
between the Roswell Incident and Mogul was first realized by researcher Robert
G. Todd, and independently by Karl T. Pflock. Recently, Charles B. Moore, one
of three surviving Project Mogul scientists identified in and interviewed for
the Air Force report, spoke to the New Mexicans for Science and Reason (NMSR)
in Albuquerque. He discussed the background of the project, the New York
University (NYU) balloon flights, and the Roswell connection. He provided new
details that would appear to virtually clinch the idea that the debris Brazel
found was indeed from one of the Project Mogul flights that Moore helped
launch. What follows is based on Moore's presentation, his answers to audience
questions, subsequent meetings and discussions with him, documents he
provided, and a monograph he is preparing on these flights. Moore, professor
emeritus of physics at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology in
Socorro, was a graduate student working for NYU back in 1947. The Mogul
project was so classified and compartmentalized that even Moore didn't know
the project's name until Robert Todd informed him of it a couple of years ago.
The unclassified purpose of the project was to develop constant-level balloons
for meteorological purposes. Its classified purpose was to try to develop a
way to monitor possible Soviet nuclear detonations with the use of
low-frequency acoustic microphones placed at high altitudes. No other means of
monitoring the nuclear activities of a closed country like the USSR was yet
available, and the project was given a high priority. One of the NYU tasks was
the development of constant-level balloons for placing the acoustic
microphones aloft. After some preliminary flights in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania,
in April 1947, which failed due to high winds, the project moved to New
Mexico. In June and early July 1947, numerous NYU balloon flights were
launched from Alamogordo Army Air Field in New Mexico. Some of these flights
consisted of very long trains containing up to two dozen neoprene sounding
balloons, having a total length of more than 600 feet.
Moore makes a strong case for the hypothesis
that NYU Flight #4, which he helped launch on June 4, 1947, was the source of
the debris Brazel found on the Foster ranch, and therefore the source of the
"Roswell Incident" itself. Many of the materials used in Flight 4 bear
striking similarities to pieces of the Roswell debris. A diagram of an
earlier, similar flight, Flight #2 (launched April 18, 1947, from Bethlehem,
Pennsylvania) shows the balloon train. No such diagram is available for Flight
4; since no altitude data were obtained for it, it was not included in formal
NYU reports. However, Moore says the configuration for Flight 4 was quite
similar to that shown. The large octahedral objects at top left and bottom
middle are radar reflectors, which were used for tracking. Several small
aluminum rings for handling the lines are indicated; the "payload" (a sonobuoy)
was supported by slightly larger rings. The cluster of neoprene sounding
balloons extended for hundreds of feet in flight. The debris Brazel picked
up--and which was later taken to Fort Worth, Texas, for inspection by
Brigadier General Roger Ramey, the Air Force commander there--matches NYU
Flight 4 in several different ways. Some of the debris consisted of patches of
a smelly, smoky gray, rubber-like material, which is consistent with the
neoprene balloons used in NYU Flight 4. Much of the Roswell debris--sticks,
metallic paper, and strangely marked tape--is similar to material used for the
radar reflectors. When Warrant Officer Irving Newton saw the debris in General
Ramey's office, he recognized it as pieces of a radar target. Moore points out
that the Ramey photographs show parts of more than one reflector; Flight 4
contained three Signal Corps ML-307B RAWIN targets.
Many witnesses of the debris described tape with flower designs
or hieroglyphics on it. Moore recalls that the reinforcing tape used on NYU
targets had curious markings. "There were about four of us who were involved
in this, and all remember that our targets had sort of a stylized, flowerlike
design. I have prepared, in my life, probably more than a hundred of these
targets for flight. And every time I have prepared one of these targets, I
have always wondered what the purpose of that tape marking was. But . . . a
major named John Peterson, laughed . . . and said 'What do you expect when you
get your targets made by a toy factory?'" The radar targets contained small
eyelets. Moore showed the NMSR audience a similar target with the eyelets. In
an article in the Roswell Daily Record on July 9, 1947, rancher Brazel
described the debris as having no strings or wire, but as having eyelets for
some sort of attachment. While many UFO proponents claim the wreckage shown in
General Ramey's office was just a weather balloon switched for the "real
debris," Moore pointed out that the radar targets used by NYU were unlike
anything flown in New Mexico before and that "they were not available in Fort
Worth to be substituted for the debris in General Ramey's office." Warrant
Officer Newton was able to recognize the debris in General Ramey's office
because he happened to have used an early version of the same targets while
serving as a weatherman in Okinawa. The earlier-model targets Newton used did
not have the reinforcing tape with the pinkish-purple flower designs. Brazel's
daughter, Bessie Brazel Schreiber, in a 1979 interview conducted by author
William Moore (no relation to Charles B. Moore), described some aluminum
ring-shaped objects in the debris that looked like pipe intake collars or the
necks of balloons. (The mention of the rings appears in William Moore's
transcript of the interview, but was not included in his book
The Roswell Incident.)
She estimated that they were about 4 inches around, and said she could put her
hand through them. Charles Moore points out that Flight 4 carried several
3-inch-diameter aluminum rings for assisting with the launching of the balloon
train, as well as larger rings used to hold the sonobuoys. These were cut from
cylindrical tubing stock, and then chamfered to prevent damage to the ropes.
Sheridan Cavitt, the CIC (Counter-Intelligence Corps) officer who accompanied
Major Jesse Marcel to the debris field, described a black box in the wreckage.
Moore says the NYU crew routinely packed batteries for the acoustic equipment
in black boxes. There has been some speculation that the black box might have
been a radiosonde, but Moore pointed out that radiosondes are usually white to
prevent absorption of heat.
 On
June 4, 1947, Flight 4 was launched, and tracked as far as Arabela, New
Mexico, only 17 miles from the location of the debris field on the Foster
ranch. Flight 4 was still aloft when the batteries ran down, and contact was
lost. Brazel reported that he found the debris on the ranch on June 14, 1947,
although most UFO proponents put the time of this discovery as a few weeks
later, in early July. Brazel didn't take the debris into Roswell until July 7,
1947, by his own account; this date is disputed as well. Recently, Charles
Moore has developed a brand-new line of evidence even further supporting a
link between the Roswell Incident and Project Mogul. UFO researcher Kevin
Randle recently provided Moore with National Weather Service wind data for
early June 1947. Moore, who has lived and breathed atmospheric physics most of
his adult life, analyzed this data in detail. His analysis deals with three
NYU flights : Flight 4 (June 4, 1947), Flight 5 (June 5), and Flight 6 (June
7). The Weather Service wind data are compatible with what is called a
baroclinic weather system moving through the area. As this "trough aloft"
slowly passes by, the winds aloft will shift from blowing toward the
northeast, then toward the east, and then toward the southeast. At very high
altitudes, however, this type of system produces high-level winds in the upper
troposphere at cross directions to those at lower levels. Furthermore, the
prevailing winds in the stratosphere during the summer months blow toward the
west, while those in the transition region just above the tropopause blew
toward the northwest during the early part of June 1947. For example, Flight 5
proceeded mainly east as it rose through the troposphere; when it entered the
stratosphere, however, it was carried to the northwest. After some balloons
burst and Flight 5 descended, it again headed in an easterly direction until
it landed. When Moore used the Weather Service wind data and NYU altitude
information to simulate the probable paths of the flights with recorded ground
tracks (Flights 5 and 6), his results agreed quite reasonably with the
measured balloon paths--Flight 5 drifted mainly to the east, landing near
Roswell, while Flight 6 took a more southwesterly route.
 Moore
then extended his analysis to Flight 4, the Roswell candidate. He used the
wind data for June 4, 1947, and assumed the flight reached altitudes
comparable to those of the subsequent two flights (which were made with very
similar balloon trains). Moore's analysis indicates that after Flight 4 lifted
off from Alamogordo, it probably ascended while traveling northeast (toward
Arabela), then turned toward the northwest during its passage through the
stratosphere, and then descended back to earth in a generally northeast
direction.
Moore's calculated balloon path is quite
consistent with a landing at the Foster ranch, approximately 85 miles
northeast of the Alamogordo launch site and 60 miles northwest of Roswell.
Furthermore, the debris was strewn along the ground at a
southwest-to-northeast angle (as reported by Major Jesse Marcel); this angle
is entirely consistent with Moore's analysis. Charles B. Moore has been
repeatedly criticized in the UFO literature for changing some of his earlier
statements. He was interviewed for William Moore's book on the Roswell
Incident. After hearing Bill Moore's description of the wreckage (including
details of supposed 10-inch furrows running some 500 feet), Charlie Moore
responded by saying: "Based on the description you gave me, I think that
could not have been our balloon." Balloon trains like Flight 4 were far too
light to make large furrows in the ground. The issue is not that Charles
Moore said the wreckage couldn't have been a balloon--it's that he said his
flights couldn't have plowed the alleged "furrows." On another note, Moore
and other Mogul participants originally thought the debris Brazel found must
have been from one of NYU's polyethylene balloon flights from early July
1947. He held this opinion until just a couple of years ago. These large,
transparent polyethylene balloons were used for the first time ever in the
summer of 1947 and would have looked strange even to experienced balloon
watchers. However, after seeing the reports and photographs from 1947 for
the first time, Charles Moore realized that Flight 4 was a much better
candidate for the Foster ranch debris than a polyethylene balloon. So he has
changed his opinions on the incident, but only because better data became
available.
 Atmostpheric
physicist Charles B. Moore displays a radar reflector similar to those
carried aloft on trains of balloons in Project Mogul experiments he helped
launch from Alamogordo Army Air Field in New Mexico in June and early July
1947. New York University Flight #4 carried three of these reflectors and
before being lost was tracked to within 17 miles of the spot where rancher
Mac Brazel later recovered debris that prompted the famous "Roswell
Incident" case.
 Moore's
presentation included fascinating details on the background of Project
Mogul. He noted that the discovery of the acoustic "duct" between the
troposphere and the stratosphere came about as a result of a World War II
era analysis of globally propagated sound waves produced by the volcanic
explosion of Krakatoa in 1883. In one of their flights, he said the NYU crew
attempted (without success) to detect explosions from the British
destruction of German installations on the island of Helgoland (off the
north German coast) in April 1948. While UFO proponents allege a lack of
contemporary references to "Project Mogul Balloon Flights," Moore says the
project was so compartmentalized that such references simply may not exist.
Any mention of these flights will instead be labeled as NYU constant-level
balloon research. Several UFO authors claim that the wreckage, and possibly
alien bodies as well, were secretly flown to Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio
for analysis.
By coincidence, Moore says he and the rest
of the NYU balloon crew stayed over at Wright Field the evening of July 8,
1947, en route back to New Jersey, just as the Roswell story was breaking.
Moore says they first learned of the incident while in Dayton, and figured
that it was probably caused by one of their recent polyethylene balloon
flights. The September 1994 Air Force report indicates that the Brazel
debris also made its way to Wright Field. During an Air Force interview of
Mogul participant Colonel Albert C. Trakowski, he recalled a July 1947
telephone call from Colonel Marcellus Duffy, who was stationed at Wright
Field and was intimately knowledgeable about both Project Mogul and military
weather equipment. Duffy told Trakowski that a fellow from New Mexico came
to Dayton, woke him up in the middle of the night, and showed him the
debris. Colonel Duffy told the fellow, "It looks like some of the stuff
you've been launching at Alamogordo." What is the bottom line on the Roswell
Incident, NYU, and Project Mogul? In Moore's words, "When the wind
information is coupled with the similarities in the debris described by the
eyewitnesses--the balsa sticks, the 'tinfoil,' the tape with pastel,
pinkish-purple flowers, the smoky gray balloon rubber with a burnt odor, the
eyelets, the tough paper, the four-inch-diameter aluminum pieces and the
black box--to the materials used in our balloon flight trains, it appears to
me that it would be difficult to exclude NYU Flight 4 as a likely source of
the debris that W. W. Brazel found on the Foster ranch in 1947."
About the
Author:
Dave Thomas is a physics and
mathematics graduate of New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, and is
currently a senior scientist at Quatro Corporation in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
He is vice president and communications officer of
New
Mexicans for Science and Reason.
_____________________________________________
|
TIMES
SQUARE PRESS-ELITE ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL. ( Est.
1984)
In Collaboration
with Amazon.com Company
FROM
ZETA RETICULI TO EARTH. TIME, SPACE, AND THE UFO TECHNOLOGY: Scientific
Frontiers of Alien Space Crafts. by Maximillien De Lafayette
(Paperback - Dec 5,
2007)
UFOs
and the Alien Agenda. The complete book of UFOs, encounters, abductions &
aliens bases on earth: The whole story of UFOs, Aliens and Abductees
by Maximillien De Lafayette (Paperback
- Dec 24, 2007)
THE
BIGGEST CONTROVERSIES, CONSPIRACIES, THEORIES AND COVERUPS OF OUR TIME: From
the secret files of science, politics, occult and religion
by Maximillien De Lafayette (Paperback
- Dec 11, 2007)
The
Anunnaki's Genetic Creation of the Human Race.: UFOs, Aliens And God, Then And
Now by Maximillien De Lafayette (Paperback
- Jan 4, 2008)
Extraterrestrials
Agenda. Aliens Origin, Species, SOCIETIES, Intentions And Plan For Humanity:
Secret Dimensions of Ufology by Maximillien De Lafayette
(Paperback - Jan 3,
2008)
UFO-USO
AND EXTRATERRESTRIALS OF THE SEA:
