Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 07:09:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Mantell a Mystery?
I DO NOT GET POSTINGS HERE. I GET DAILY DIGESTS AT THE END
OF THE DAY SO YOU SHOULD "CC" ME DIRECTLY T MY EMAIL ADDRESS IF YOU
HAVE ANY COMMENTS.
I read over the posted June 1994 CAUS article on Mantell expecting
to find a RECORD of a Skyhook launch on Jan 6, 1948. I was hoping
to find a THEODOLITE tracking on a MAP, since "theodolite" tracking was
made much of in the article. I was bitterly disappointed to find
neither. In fact there is an eerie deja vu here with the infamous
C B Moore again involved in peddling questionable stories about balloon
antics that are not documented and are flagrantly contradicted by the
facts -- just like with his wholesale falsification of the Roswell
MOGUL balloon fiction which Dave Rudiak and I thoroughly exploded as a
tissue of lies, deceit and fabrication from start to finish (more on
Moore's lies below).
If it was a UFO it was very poorly documented. If it was a
Skyhook balloon it was very poorly documented.
How do we _know_ the alleged Skyhook balloon was lost after
passing the Georgia/So Carolina coastline? That kind of assertion
in the article makes it seem like there was a TRACKING of the balloon
over a distance of 1,000+ miles out to the Georgia/SoCar coast, a
seemingly solid documentary record.
Or is this just a bald assertion based simply on drawing a
straight line from Camp Ripley, Minn., to Mantell's crash site near
Franklin, Ky., and then continuing the line out to the Georgia/So
Car? That is not a RECORD, that is a hypothetical extrapolation
dressed up to LOOK like a documentary record made at the time, in 1948,
which is not quite kosher, it's misleading. That would be pretty
amazing given all the cross-winds at altitude that are hypothesized
just to get a Camp Ripley -- Believe it or Not! -- balloon over central
Kentucky at the time of the Mantell and other sightings, and to stop
and start at the right time, etc.
Interestingly the AF claimed to have had actual "wind plots"
(Ruppelt book p. ) to show that a Clinton County AFB Skyhook launch
would have traveled SW to the sighting area in Kentucky -- about 90
degrees off of C B Moore's alleged SE heading claimed for the purported
Camp Ripley balloon. How is that possible? Where are the
WEATHER RECORDS to prove the Camp Ripley theory??? Moore is a
meteorologist for crying out loud so where are the meteorological
records to support his baseless theory??? At least the Clinton
County Skyhook theory has WEATHER RECORDS, but these would seem to
contradict any Camp Ripley balloon path.
The article claims that "Complete weather and tracking data for
the Camp Ripley laumch are not available for the entire path."
Well that implies there ARE such "weather and tracking data" available
for SOME of the balloon flight path so WHERE IS IT????
Speaking of amazing coincidences, isn't it a pretty extraordinary
"coincidence" that just a few hours after an alleged Skyhook balloon
supposedly passes over the general region that at 7:20-8:00 PM (EST) on
Jan 7, 1948, or almost 2 HOURS AFTER SUNSET AT BALLOON ALTITUDE AND
WHEN THE BALLOON COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE SEEN there were
Skyhook-balloon-like sightings from Lockbourne AFB and Clinton County
AFB in southern Ohio??? How is that possible??? Pretty
amazing when one considers a Skyhook could not possibly have been seen
as a classic "ice cream cone" shape in PITCH DARKNESS of night.
Even if the instrument package underneath the balloon carried a tiny
light the light could not possibly have illuminated the 100-foot
cone-shaped gas bag above it. These are just physical
impossibilities you can take to the bank.
Here is what I found in the AF file on the Mantell case about
these impossible NIGHTTIME Skyhook-like sightings of a "flaming red
cone" with "intense brightness" seen by the Clinton County Air Field
Control Tower operators and flight crew members, an object so bright
that when a cloud drifted in front of it the object's light could still
be seen even though stars were completely blotted out (Maxwell Roll 3,
p. 737; see also Sign Roll 1, p. 513-4, 518, 526-7, 531, etc.):
"Description of object seen at Clinton AFB.
"A. 6 observers at Wilmington, site of
Clinton AFB, stated that a cone shaped
object ... similar to what a partially
inflated Skyhook balloon would look like. It was in sight
for approx. 30 [mins]
All stated it disappeared in general
"B. 2 observers described it as an inverted
triangle or a cone -- it climbed and
descended. Wind was from Ne to
SW, which is in the exact
direction of GODMAN.
"CONE INVERTED TRIANGLE
I noticed in the article that famed astronomer Carl Seyfert's
sighting of a balloon from Vanderbilt Observatory near Nashville,
Tenn., is seriously MISQUOTED leaving out the crucial observation that
the balloon seen in the SSE was "moving first SE" (which would fit the
Camp Ripley Skyhook theory) but then it WENT WEST "then W" which would
contradict the Ripley Believe It or Not Skyhook balloon theory.
The part saying "then W" was left out and no ellipses indicated any
deletion, and so was the word "first" left out of "moving first SE,
then W" so as to further cover up the direction change. There
were several other distortions in the mangled quotation or
misquotation. (Maxwell Roll 3, p. 711)
If the Camp Ripley Skyhook was held stationary for 1-1/2 hours
from 1:45 to 3:15 PM (CST) as the article and Moore apparently both
claim, because of ascending into a "turnaround altitude" from 60,000 to
75,000 ft then how is it that astronomer Seyfert just over an hour
later at 4:30 PM CST estimated the balloon was at just 25,000 ft moving
at 10 mph, a speed which Moore seemed agree with. But you can't
have both because if Seyfert was able to accurately estimate a 10 mph
speed then he must have had a reasonable estimate of distance and
height in order to calculate the speed. If the Skyhook was
rapidly descending 35,000+ ft in perhaps another 1 hour then it should
have impacted the ground in south-central Tennessee at about 5:30 PM
CST. It could not possibly then have traveled to the Atlantic
Ocean over the Georgia/So Car border as Moore claims.
The article claims, based on what Moore was alleging, that the
Navy did the Skyhook launch from Camp Ripley but did not disclose this
at the time to the AF investigation of the Mantell crash because the
Navy did not want to get blamed for Mantell's death. We also get
the usual bullshit about how Skyhook was "highly classified" at the
time, too, which it WAS NOT. It was HIGHLY PUBLICIZED at the
time. Certain projects using Skyhooks were classified but not the
Skyhook launches or the Skyhook balloons. This is a cute new
"reasonable coverup" theory similar to the Roswell MOGUL fraud but it's
missing any proof that the NAVY launched the Skyhook from Camp Ripley
on Jan 6, 1948. Moore's finding photos of the alleged Camp Ripley
launch in his files implies that he personally was there and that he
launched the Skyhook (why not say so? why conceal his personal
involvement?). But Moore was under AIR FORCE CONTRACT at the time
and he is able to cite chapter and verse by AF Contract Number "AF
19(122)-633" to prove that Clinton County, Ohio, was not launching
Skyhooks until 1951, but doesn't do the same for Camp Ripley in
1948. Where is the NAVY CONTRACT NUMBER and PROJECT
IDENTIFICATION for the Camp Ripley Skyhooks in 1948????
Where is the actual RECORD of the alleged Skyhook balloon launch
from Camp Ripley, Minn., on Jan 6, 1948???? It was launched at
"about" 8 AM? Why is there no exact recorded time? Is that
because this "record" is actually all dependent on the confabulated
convenient memory of one person, C B Moore, one of the most notorious
liars in the history of UFOlogy who has been caught redhanded in
numerous outright proven lies and falsifications of data and
preposterous math? Moore makes George Adamski look like an honest
Boy Scout in comparison.
Moore has lied in his many debunking stories on Roswell and other
subjects over many years going back to at least 1966 when he admitted
outright lying to Jim McDonald, as recorded in McDonald's notes:
1. Moore claims that White Sands Proving Ground had only ONE
TRACKING RADAR, an SCR-584, in July 1947, when hoaxer Frank Kaufmann
aka "Steve MacKenzie" had alleged a phony-baloney Roswell crash story,
and that this SCR-584 radar had a range of less than 40 miles therefore
could not have been working with other radars to plot a UFO crash 130
miles from White Sands as Kaufmann had claimed.
"... since the SCR-584's
maximum range was less than 40 miles,
it could provide no
information whatsoever on objects outside that
range. There was no way
that the information from it would be used
in conjunction with radars in
Albuquerque (if there were any at the
160 mile range) to plot the
location of the crash north of Roswell
[claimed by Frank
Kaufmann/MacKenzie], about 130 miles from the
White Sands radar."
Moore knew this was a blatant lie since he personally as the
project engineer for AMC Watson Labs Project MOGUL at White Sands had
been in charge of at least 4 of the 5 or more different tracking radars
at White Sands in July 1947, and he knew that all of these radars had
been MODIFIED TO EXTEND THEIR RANGE to at least 100-250 MILES so they
could track V-2 flights at 100+ miles altitude, and had been since the
start of the White Sands launch program in Summer of 1946.
We know this from many different sources including teletype
messages from MOORE's own AMC Watson Labs unit at White Sands in July
1947, which Bob Todd dug up, which reported the flights of 100-mile V-2
shots which had been tracked with Watson Labs' two (2) modified SCR-270
radars, one modified CPS-4 radar and one modified CPS-5 radar.
There are also UFO reports in the AF files from 1947 describing
trackings by Moore's MOGUL team with a "CPS-5 (Modified)" at 200+ miles
range, thus belying Moore's false claim that White Sands had only one
radar limited to less than 40 miles' range.
Here are the 5 tracking radars at White Sands in July 1947 that we
know about (there may have been more):
CPS-5 all modified for
extended range 100-200+ miles
A radar limited to only 40 miles would have been useless in
tracking V-2's out to 100+ miles.
Smithsonian aerospace historian David DeVorkin has also documented
the early postwar history of White Sands's MULTIPLE TRACKING RADARS and
"There were sets of Signal
Corps S- and X-band reflective RADAR TRACKING
sets at White Sands for
range, azimuth, and elevation information. These
radar systems yielded
first-order trajectory analysis and identification of
the impact point. Their
application began during the first firing season [in
the Summer of 1946] and was
undertaken not only to provide range control
and data, but to refine the
[modified] radar systems themselves at the
Laboratory." (Science With a Vengeance, p. 113b)
2. Moore falsified a map of Roswell's vicinity!!!
Moved "Roswell AAF" itself by about 7 miles to help cover up a weakness
in his debunking story against the Roswell case, in a map he claims he
was merely faithfully "copying" from an earlier report he had issued in
1948 (when I compared the 1995 falsified map with the 1948 original he
supposedly "copied" I found the blatant discrepancy). Can you
imagine that?? Falsifying a map! How low can you get?
It's like the Soviets in the Cold War who would falsify locations of
military related cities on their published maps.
He moved "Roswell AAF" because he had claimed no one at Roswell
AAF knew about the supposedly supersecret MOGUL project balloons and
thus were surprised at the balloon debris. He didn't want anyone
wondering how Roswell AAF could know nothing of MOGUL balloons when a
650-foot MOGUL balloon passed only 4 miles south of the Roswell AAF
airfield and within clear sight of the Tower right along its
southwest-looking main runway in broad daylight on July 5, 1947, three
days before the Roswell incident. By moving "Roswell AAF" seven
miles away it made the close approach of the MOGUL balloon on that date
look like it was 11 miles away instead of 4 miles, and thus look like
it could have been missed, or at least not arouse doubts and provoke
questions in readers of his Roswell debunking book. Very shady
trickery and totally dishonest for a supposed scientist claiming the
mantle of scientific accuracy.
3. Moore claims he never even knew the supersecret "MOGUL"
project codename while he himself worked in MOGUL in the late 40's, had
no idea there was a MOGUL codename for what he had been doing until Bob
Todd contacted him and revealed it to him in 1992 or thereabouts.
Moore uses this bullshit story to support his claim that MOGUL was so
compartmented and supersecret in 1947 that that helps explain why it
took so long to come up with the MOGUL balloon explanation for Roswell,
and how Roswell 509th would know nothing about MOGUL, how other
activities at White Sands would have known nothing of MOGUL, etc. etc.
In fact this is just another of Moore's bold-faced lies through
his teeth: Moore had in his own files a May 12, 1949, letter from
White Sands PIO and Navy Unit commander, Cdr. Mclaughlin, to Dr. James
Van Allen, discussing how CHARLES B. MOORE HAD BEEN IN CHARGE OF
"PROJECT MOGUL" there at White Sands. Moore had this letter in
his own files all along and had even shared a copy with McDonald back
4. Jim McDonald caught Moore lying to him about Hynek
supposedly supporting a challenge to the AF over UFO policy and when
this false setup trick resulted in McDonald's now famous blowup with
Hynek on June 8, 1966 (when Hynek's baffled response showed he knew
nothing about such a challenge), McDonald then confronted Moore and
noted that Moore had ADMITTED lying that he had "not been entirely
honest" with McDonald.
5. There are many other falsifications of balloon flight
paths, numbers and other details on Roswell too tedious to list
here. These have been posted many times on UFO UpDates and
Thus Moore has no credibility with me after this sorry
record. His statements about a Skyhook from Camp Ripley are not
worth the paper they're printed on. Any value they might have can
only come from completely independent credible documents, in which case
Moore's contribution would become entirely superfluous.
The Mantell crash itself seems to suffer from outright
doubletalk. In the same Accident Report it first says Mantell's
fighter crashed because "as nose depressed, [Mantell] finally began a
spiralling dive which resulted in excessive speeds causing gradual
disintegration." So Mantell's aircraft was in a crash dive nose
down going so fast it broke apart, yet then the report admits the plane
did not hit ground nose first but came down pancaking flat on its
belly, while still trying to maintain the fiction of coming "straight
down," but IN A "HORIZONTAL POSITION"!!! Huh???? Note the
"The aircraft came straight
down in a horizontal position and
landed on the left side."
(Maxwell Roll 3 p. 750)