The Theology of Ufology

Lance Moody’s recent comment about David Rudiak’s Roswell/UFO belief system…

“[David can be and always [is] in the service of his Lord, Saucer Jesus”

… goes to what happens to people who become enmeshed in the UFO (Roswell) topic; they become religious-like in their adherence to the phenomenon.

For instance, in my several year association with Anthony Bragalia, I’ve seen him become fanatically “catholic” about UFOs, with Roswell becoming the core of his belief system, even as he eschews some of the other UFO cults (Trent/McMinnville, Socorro, et cetera).

David Rudiak, whom Lance references, is evangelical about UFOs and Roswell is his “Jesus.”

Kevin Randle is like a Seven Day Adventist: sort of believing after once fervently believing in UFOs as the prime example of ET visitation.

The ultimate atheist is Zoam Chomsky, followed less fervently by Gilles Fernandez and Lance Moody himself.

The agnostics – CDA and me – accept UFOs as real but have no idea what the essence of the phenomenon (or phenomena) is (are).

One can find other UFO aficionados who might have a theological or non-theological belief system intact – many being visitors here – but I’ll leave the comment section for them to add their confessionals.

RR

Read More

David Rudiak responds but....

I got a comment from David Rudiak for the posting prior to this but I'm not putting it down for posterity. It was a personal attack, which David can't refrain from doing....he has little sense of humor when it comes to Roswell or UFOs altogether.

But I'd like to insist that in the Roswell time-frame there were lots of balloon tests going on, besides Mogul or Helios. For example, this from the NASA archives:

A description is presented of main balloon applications, giving attention to the Skyhook project, the Moby-Dick project, the Transosonde project, the Rockoon project, and the projects Stratolab and Manhigh.

David is fixated on Mogul and we all know why, don't we?

Mac Brazel was a dolt, and his "debris" was balloon scrap, just as the Army said.

RR

Read More

Our Source(s) for the Brazel/Roswell Alien Debris Dismissal

David Rudiak likes to think that his Roswell site is the fount of all information about Roswell and that material appearing online comes from his site.

However, some of us have been at this a lot longer than Mr. Rudiak, and we have, online, material that does not derive from his site.....exactly the opposite often occurs.

If one Googles the title of our previous Brazel posting, they will find this:

http://ufocon.blogspot.com/2007/04/original-sources-of-1947-roswell_26.html

http://ufocon.blogspot.com/2007_04_22_archive.html

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ParanormalGhostSociety/conversations/topics/50152

Our original information from the NASA archives along with a site that borrowed our input, which is okay with us. (There are others as you'll see with a Google search.)

Moreover, here is an insert that causes us to speculate on the Brazel "debris" find:

And here is the full paper from December 1947 that tells us Mac Brazel found something from the tests that took place in his area......this does not come from Mr. Rudiak's site. We found it during our "research" years ago:

Controlled Balloon Flights over Roswell, July 1947

RR

Read More

Kenneth Arnold: Delusional ET Believer or Observer of Actual Odd Flying Objects?

This appeared in the article, pictured above [Saturday Evening Post, April 30, 1949]:

Arnold, while investigating the (alleged) Maury Island sighting in June 1947, generally considered a hoax, saw, "while flying to the scene of the investigation," as the segment above reports, a "covey of twenty-five flying disks."

Did Arnold really see 25 flying disks or had he become delusional within the hectic flying saucer cultural milieu of the time period?

One can make a case for delusion [See Symptoms of Psychopathology, John Wiley & Sons, 1970, Page 55 ff.].

While Kenneth Arnold's initial iconic sighting of nine objects near Mount Ranier is still open to interpretation, his stated observation of a covey of twenty-five flying disks bespeaks a mental disorder.

Or did he really see a covey of flying disks? His testimony seems incredulous. But does that demean his original "flying saucer" sighting, June 24th, 1947?

Just as current and long-time UFO aficionados (you know who I mean) have become ET obsessed when it comes to UFOs, without any substantive proof of an extraterrestrial connection to the phenomenon. one can understand the psychological mechanisms at work in the symptomatic array that UFO buffs have become immersed in.

This is what happened to Kenneth Arnold, at a time when flying disk hysteria was prevalent, even rampant.

Or one can say that Arnold saw nine odd flying objects and even a covey of twenty-five shortly thereafter.

But that would be participating in the hysterical delusion, would it not?

RR

Read More

If UFOs are ephemeral or neurological, how does one explain this?

Stephen Michalak Falcon Lake, Manitoba 1967

Sonny Desvergers West Palm Beach, Florida 1952

Or this from http://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/ufo-burn.htm

During the great sighting outbreak of early November 1957, a number of close encounters had a disturbing consequence: burns and related injuries to witnesses. One of the most dramatic occurrences took place at an army base at Itaipu along Brazil's Atlantic coast. At 2 A.M. on November 4 two guards saw a luminous orange disc coming in over the ocean at a low altitude and an alarming rate of speed. As it passed above the soldiers, the disc came to an instant stop.

The two witnesses suddenly felt a wave of heat and a horrifying sensation as if they had burst into flame. Their screams brought other soldiers stumbling out of their barracks just in time to see the UFO streak away. At that moment the fort's entire electrical system failed. Amid great secrecy the two men were rushed to a military hospital and treated during the next few weeks for first-and second-degree burns to ten percent of their bodies.

But there were other burn cases as well. In the afternoon of the same day as the Itaipu incident, the engines of several cars along a rural highway near Orogrande, New Mexico, ceased to function as an egg-shaped object maneuvered close by. A witness who stood particularly close to it contracted a "sunburn." In the early morning hours of November 6, outside Merom, Indiana, a hovering UFO, which bathed his farm in light, also seriously burned René Gilham's face. He ended up spending two days in the hospital.

At around 1:30 A.M. on November 10 a Madison, Ohio, woman saw an acorn-shaped UFO hovering just behind her garage. She watched it for half an hour. In the days afterward she developed a body rash and vision problems that her doctor believed suggested radiation poisoning.

RR

Read More

Pseudo-Science: Ufology, of course

Read More

Mac Brazel's Roswell Find: Balloon Debris but not Mogul Debris!

Some Roswellian advocates insist upon the idea that Mac Brazel found debris from a crashed flying disk, from which the errant Haut press release derived.

They argue that Project Mogul did not cover what Brazel discovered, and they are right.

But what he did find was still debris, but from Project Helios and here's what Brazel found:

The New York University Balloon Group was organized in November, 1946 to develop and fly constant level balloons that would carry Army Air Forces' instruments aloft for the long range detection of nuclear explosions. In 1947, while awaiting the delivery of the polyethylene balloons to be used in these flights, tests were made using clusters of neoprene, meteorological sounding balloons. In June, flight operations started in Alamogordo AAF, NM where three full-scale flights were launched. One of these, NYU Flight #4, was last reported over Arabela, NM. From a recent examination of the Weather Bureau winds aloft reports and of the ground tracks of the two subsequent NYU flights, it appears that Flight #4 is a likely candidate to explain the debris later recovered north-northwest of Arabela.

And here is a web-ste dealing with the Mogul matter, with inane comments by Roswell/ET advocates:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=93349

David Rudiak will say this is the Mogul array, but it has nothing to do with Project Helios.

Here is what it really is -- Mogul was a seprate project from Helios:

This trip was made in support of Project Helios. The primary purpose was to visit present or potential suppliers of materials need for the project. A major point of interest is the view on plastic films under consideration for the balloons. Pliofilm still seems to have most potential; nylon and polythene (polyethylene) are nowhere near mature enough to be seriously considered. 

This report describes the first outdoor inflation and flight attempt of a full-size pliofilm balloon on April 24, 1947. Purpose of the test was to obtain data on (1) proposed method of inflation; (2) use of plastic ground cover; (3) behavior of the aerostat at low wind velocity; (4) weighing off the aerostat; (5) rate of ascent; (6) operation of appendix; (7) excess lift for safe take-off without dragging; (5) balloon suspension system; (9) behavior of suspended parachute. Several preconceived opinions on these points were found wanting. A suspension harness failure precluded an actual flight. Nevertheless, the experiment was very revealing, producing information vital to any future attempt. Prior to the first outdoor inflation, a trial inflation had also been successfully made at the balloon loft. 

RR

Read More