Slashdot Mirror


New Book Reports Soviets Behind Roswell UFO Scare

jalefkowit writes "A new book by Los Angeles Times Magazine investigative reporter Annie Jacobsen, titled Area 51, reports that that the famous 1947 UFO sightings in Roswell, New Mexico, were actually an attempt by the Soviet Union to demonstrate that they could panic the American population if they wished. According to the book, the UFOs were actually aircraft derived from flying-wing technology, piloted by 'child-size aviators' surgically altered by captured Nazi doctors to appear more frightening. Skeptics note that this account is based on testimony provided to Jacobsen by a single unnamed source, who she describes as one of only five engineers given full access to the crash debris at the top-secret facility in Nevada known as Area 51."

135 comments

  1. Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Silly claims about surgically-altered child-sized navigators aside, there is a connection between the Soviets and Roswell. Project Mogul, a top secret program to spy on the Soviets, was being testing near Roswell in 1947. One of their spy balloons was what crashed in that famous incident (and why there was a subsequent cover-story and cover-up by the local military).

    In fact, if you look at the mass of "UFO" incidents, you'll notice a pretty consistent pattern. They almost always took place near secret U.S. air bases during the height of the Cold War. Doesn't take a genius to figure out that the strange lights, mysterious craft, and "men in black" that people were seeing had a lot less to do with little green men than with Cold War secrecy, paranoia, and spycraft.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last I checked it was the US military testing high altitude parachuting with crash-test dummies instead of people, dropped from a high altitude balloon.

    2. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by elrous0 · · Score: 0

      IIRC, That was a separate incident.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    3. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by steelfood · · Score: 0

      I think your argument would hold more weight if it weren't for the last section in the wikipedia article (yeah, I probably shouldn't trust wikipedia 100%, but I think it's accurate enough to believe until I hear otherwise). The flight that supposedly was the Roswell crash was also supposedly canceled due to poor weather. That reeks too much like the "magic bullet" theory to me.

      I wouldn't be surprised if the Soviets pulled a stunt like this, and there was (and still is) a massive coverup by the U.S. government. The only issue is, there are far too many assumptions to make to accept the author's premise.

      Between this and actual E.T.'s crashing, Occam's Razor feels mightly sharp right about now.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    4. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by Calindae · · Score: 1

      Occam's Razor? How about the fact that we know Russians *exist*? I would be the first to hope that there are non-Earth life forms out there, but since you mentioned assumptions, it seems assuming alien life actually exists is pretty far from lex parsimoniae.

    5. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      It's always interesting to watch the line of thought play out with this general subject. Secret aeronautical experiments during the Jet Age / Space Age / Cold War? No. Wait a second. Something just doesn't add up here. Extraterrestrial visitors crashing on our planet? Hey now - we might be on to something!

      Surgically altered pilots flying bleeding edge technology in to the heart of US air space just to screw with people sounds like a nice combination of UFO mythos. Occam's Razor indeed.

    6. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Eyewitness testimony of the Roswell wreckage is consistent with a high-altitude balloon. Witnesses described strange lightweight metal foil and strange strong but lightweight metal (keep in mind that this was before the general public would have encountered much aluminum material in consumer goods). And we know that the top secret Project Mogul was real and was testing nearby in the same time period. We also know that the military imposed a pretty heavy-handed lockdown of the materials not long after the crash and that witnesses were even threatened by MP's not to talk about the materials they had seen.

      Now, in that case, what do you think is the simplest, sanest explanation--that a Project Mogul balloon crashed or that the Soviet Union surgically altered humans to look like children and flew them in a strange craft to the middle of the desert, then crashed them, all to instill mild fear in a bunch of local rednecks? Or perhaps you believe that alien creatures capable of crossing the almost unimaginably vast emptiness of interstellar space decided to expend the vast amounts of energy needed to cross hundreds of light years--all just to go the the middle of nowhere out in the desert and buzz some military base (and maybe probe a few rednecks while they were here)?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    7. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Occam's Razor is about the simplest explanation overall - not choosing one ludicrous bunch
      of nonsense over an ever more ludicrous bunch of nonsense.

    8. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by geekoid · · Score: 1

      No, it wasn't one of their spy balloons. IT wsa are experiment. it was an experiment to see if the US can detect atomic weapons testing and/or a launch.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by TheSeventh · · Score: 1

      No where does it say humans were altered to look like children. I believe what they were trying to explain was humans that were already short (dwarfs, little people, race-horse jockeys) were altered to look like aliens.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean that they're not out to get you.
    10. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Look, believe whatever you want to, Agent Mulder.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    11. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it were the US, I've always thought that it might have been to convince or attempt to at least convince the Soviets and others that an ~Alien technology had fallen into our laps. Now don't fuck with us or we'll use this on you. >8~D

    12. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the Soviets would classify floating a secret high-altitude balloon over their country in an attempt to determine if they were doing atomic testing as "spying."

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    13. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

      I think that was steelfood's point - that yes, this explanation, however outlandish, is simpler than assuming humanoid alien life capable of interstellar/planetary travel.

      I take much the same approach on the "fake" moon landing pictures. If we presume the apparent photographic problems like rocks overlapping film crosshairs are actually there, then assuming that some of the photos were doctored is realistic - it doesn't mean that the entire event involving thousands of people and enormous amounts of hardware were fake. Faking the photos is easy, faking an entire moon mission is difficult. Therefore if the photos are faked it's more likely that just the photos were faked.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    14. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by RCGodward · · Score: 1

      Look, believe whatever you want to, Spooky.

      FTFY

    15. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      On a related note, I've always been intrigued with Project Blue Book and its ilk and their role in the Cold War. The goals of this program and others were to covertly survey the public around secret military bases to find out what they knew about the technology being tested there (the "Tell me about any strange craft you've seen" question), as well as to determine if there had been any legitimate sightings of Soviet spycraft on U.S. soil (and if anything could be learned from these sightings).

      But I've often wondered if an secondary goal of this wasn't to actually encourage the public belief in extraterrestrial UFO's. After all, the Air Force, et.al. were very well-served by alien conspiracy theories that diverted attention away from questions about the actual secret aircraft and spycraft they were testing. Did they see this as a tool? Did they actually encourage the nutballs?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    16. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by Progman3K · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a great plan; start a terror campaign to make Americans believe an alien invasion is about to start.

      There's no way the soviet people could also have heard about it, what with the news media blaring. No danger of it backfiring on the soviets.

      I believe think-tanks are a bit smarter than that.

      Nice try, book-selling charlatan.

      --
      I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
    17. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a great plan; start a terror campaign to make Americans believe an alien invasion is about to start.

      Except that would be an incredibly stupid way to go about it. If you were going to do something like that (and it would be a stupid idea, on so *many* levels), you wouldn't crash your "alien craft" on some desert farm in the middle of bumfuck nowhere. You would crash it in a suburb, or near a city. And, even so, the panic wouldn't last very long--because a quick autopsy would reveal the "alien" pilots to be human almost immediately. Not only that, but the U.S. government would tear your "UFO" apart and find Soviet serial numbers and markings on the parts (removing all traceable evidence of earthly construction from a modern aircraft would be almost impossible)--and use that as a pretense for possible war (or, at least, a very embarrassing reveal at the UN).

      No remotely sane person would buy that as a workable plan. It's so epically stupid, it almost boggles the mind that anyone would even dare propose it , much less execute it.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    18. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      What news media? You do realize you're talking about 1947 Soviet Russia, right?

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    19. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Funny

      It was to be announced at the Party Congress on Monday. As you know, the Premier loves surprises.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    20. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by GooberToo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The story is beyond stupid. The well established history of the advancement in aerodynamics in the US completely disproves the story.

      Frankly, aliens are more likely that this bullshit story...and that's saying a lot!

    21. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      What news media? You do realize you're talking about 2001 Corporate Amerikkka, right?

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    22. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by socz · · Score: 1

      You know, you make a very valid point:

      You would crash it in a suburb, or near a city. And, even so, the panic wouldn't last very long--because a quick autopsy would reveal the "alien" pilots to be human almost immediately.

      I think crashing it into a big city would cause an undesired side affect - setting off an entire nation and gaining further support for mass armament.

      So here's what I would do, besides using a font straight out of predator for everything, I would basically finish the job on the inside that was started on the outside of the 'freaky pilots.' Throw in some komodo dragon parts, maybe an ostrich gizzard or two, and for good measure, an elephant's trunk. That'll do something! (oh and take out all of the human body parts). Sure, there are other things to take into consideration - how to get the 'ufo' there in the first place. But i'm sure that's easy when compared to the 'rest of the mission.'

      Don't forget that both they and us had no limits to stop whatever crazy ideas we had to one up each other. And remember, Area 51 'officially, doesn't exist.'

      --
      My abilities are only limited by my imagination
    23. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I remember all sorts of UFO theories about triangular and not round UFOs near Area 51 and how they had to be alien in origin because the crafts were very quiet and didn't appear on civilian radar. Then a decade later the government acknowledged the existence of the F-117 Nighthawk and the B-2 Spirit and no one would admit that all people saw were merely secret but terrestrial military aircraft.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    24. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by muindaur · · Score: 1

      With my sense of humor I would have made the dummies look like little grey men. Just to mess with conspiracy theorists heads.

    25. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by RealGene · · Score: 1

      My only regret is that I have no mod points to offer you for a superb pop culture Cold War reference...

      --
      Mission: To provide products that consume time and energy as entertainingly as permitted by the laws of thermodynamics.
    26. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Occam's Razor? How about the fact that we know Russians *exist*?

      Do you? Have you ever been to this Russia you speak of? All I know is some other people tell me it exists. Just like they tell me the aliens don't. Coincidence? I THINK NOT.

    27. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      That too, except there you won't be sent to a forced labor camp for watching John Stewart instead of Fox News.

      Except if they catch you streaming it illegally...

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    28. Re:Bullshit, but a kernel of truth there by filthpickle · · Score: 1

      It's about choosing the one that makes the least amount of assumptions. Not necessarily the simplest. Although it has come to mean that.

  2. I'm skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Russians? Nazis? Not according to any movie I've seen.

    1. Re:I'm skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russians? Nazis? Not according to any movie I've seen.

      clearly you missed Indiana Jones And The Crystal Skull

  3. This is a claim, and not a 'report' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is an unsubstantiated claim and not a report. Absolutely ridiculous.

    1. Re:This is a claim, and not a 'report' by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      It's a better explanation than "some alien species buzzed our planet and got shot down over the USA in the 1940's".

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:This is a claim, and not a 'report' by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      Heh, not by much... 'surgically altered (by Nazis no less) childlike aviators from Russia' is damn near as loony as it gets.. I'm looking forward towards the movie.. It would be right up Oliver Stone's alley..

      Straighten Up and Fly Right

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    3. Re:This is a claim, and not a 'report' by hal2814 · · Score: 2

      I know what's really going on. I know it's the queers. They're in it with the aliens. They're building landing strips for gay Martians.

      You know what Stuart, I like you. You're not like the other people, here in the trailer park.

  4. Who cares by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    I know we're all naturally curious creatures, and love a good narrative, but no experimental technology, political conflict, or conspiracy surrounding a single crash in the 40s is going to have much bearing against todays in-use technologies, political conflicts, or conspiracies(if there are any). Whatever happened is essentially irrelevant today, unless it was aliens(it wasn't aliens).

    1. Re:Who cares by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2

      Well, yes. We should just ignore history. After all, today's in-use technologies, political conflicts, and possible conspiracies had nothing to do with what happened in the past.

    2. Re:Who cares by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      But if it weren't for the Roswell incident, we probably never would have gotten Deus Ex.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  5. They did panic the American population. by olsmeister · · Score: 1

    It was called the Cuban missile crisis.

    1. Re:They did panic the American population. by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ah yes, the good old Cuban Missile Crisis of 1947. I remember it well.

      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    2. Re:They did panic the American population. by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Yes, much like douche bag MacArthur telling Truman it'd be be grand idea to drop up to 50 nukes on China. But I think you might have the timeline for it all a bit off.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    3. Re:They did panic the American population. by lexsird · · Score: 1

      Yes, much like douche bag MacArthur telling Truman it'd be be grand idea to drop up to 50 nukes on China.

      I am missing how that would have been a bad idea. In fact, I still think it would be a great idea.

      --
      Take the Red Pill.
    4. Re:They did panic the American population. by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2

      Why would you want to destroy the supply chain for Walmart? Can you and your kind really afford to shop elsewhere?

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    5. Re:They did panic the American population. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny how the supposed protectors of the poor mock them at every occasion. Of course, your policies keep them poor, so it's really no surprise to us.

  6. The real headline is by robot256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An obscure journalist attempts to demonstrate that she can capture the attention of the media by publishing yet another a crackpot conspiracy theory.

    1. Re:The real headline is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Obscure? Hardly. Don't you remember her? She's the one who can't tell the difference between Syrian musicians and terrorists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Jacobsen

    2. Re:The real headline is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, this isn't really a conspiracy theory. There's exactly one party, the guys in the Soviet Union who built and flew this thing. It seems logically like a reasonable explanation to me (nothing particularly far-fetched about painting a plane silver and sending some burn victims in), though I doubt it's any more accurate than all the others.

    3. Re:The real headline is by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      Nope, she works for the Los Angeles Times, a reputable newspaper whose halo of truth shines on all its journalists. Her book is 544 pages, of which 30 contain this account. If she's making it up, then we must conclude that the Los Angeles Times and a whole lot of other reputable journalists make shit up on a regular basis, and we know this simply isn't true. Journalists are only allowed to print facts that have been independently verified by their editors. Get some knowledge before you spout off anti-journalist conspiracy theories, you stupid teabagger.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    4. Re:The real headline is by geekoid · · Score: 1

      She isn't obscure, and quite frankly I am shocked at how who journalism skill falls away at the end of the book.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:The real headline is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If she's making it up, then we must conclude that the Los Angeles Times and a whole lot of other reputable journalists make shit up on a regular basis"

      This is not a valid conclusion to jump to at all. Many times we've seen journalists at reputable organizations found to have made up stuff for a story. Regardless of the validity of this book, your logic in claiming it true is flawed.

    6. Re:The real headline is by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      The Soviets, apparently wanting to scare a bunch of local rednecks in some desert shithole town, send in "flying-wing technology, piloted by 'child-size aviators' surgically altered by captured Nazi doctors to appear more frightening."

      That seems perfectly reasonable to you? Really?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    7. Re:The real headline is by brusk · · Score: 1

      It is a conspiracy theory. The principal party to the conspiracy would be not the Soviets but the US government agency/ies that covered it up. It's also a stupid theory, of course.

      --
      .sig withheld by request
    8. Re:The real headline is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If she's making it up, then we must conclude that the Los Angeles Times and a whole lot of other reputable journalists make shit up on a regular basis,

      That's a non-sequitur.

      and we know this simply isn't true

      So that's fallacious nonsense. She can write what the hell she likes in her spare time, the book was not published by the LA Times and so was not fact-checked nor in any way vouched for by them.

    9. Re:The real headline is by GreyyGuy · · Score: 1

      If it is true, then it worked didn't it? And it is certainly less crazy than a number of other well documented spy/war/cold war evens.

    10. Re:The real headline is by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      Government report says is was a dry run:

      http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/010096.php

    11. Re:The real headline is by lexsird · · Score: 1

      Are we talking about the LA Times that slightly overshadows The Enquirer in reputation of truth? Sarcasm or did I fall into some cosmic bunny hole?

      --
      Take the Red Pill.
    12. Re:The real headline is by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      She does admit that this last part (the faked aliens/ufo thing) is not substantiated. She only includes it at the very end of a book about Area 51 that is much more thoroughly documented. She does not say that this new theory is true and is careful to say that it is only the word of this one guy who she was referred to by her other sources.

    13. Re:The real headline is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By which of course you mean to say that a blog with a quoted source link to a non-existent blog claims the Government says it was a dry run. Yeah, real convincing.

    14. Re:The real headline is by tgeller · · Score: 1

      This barely merits a response, but what the hell. Where to start?

      >Journalists are only allowed to print facts that have been independently verified by their editors.

      O.K., I can find three errors of fact in this sentence:

      1) "Allowed"? By whom? The Federal Bureau of Truth? You posit an authority where there is none.

      2) "...to print facts". You've never heard of an opinion column, or advocacy journalism?

      3) "...independently verified by their editors". I don't know what newsroom you work in -- I'm guessing it's none, ever. But as a working writer of over a decade, including a few years in what could fairly be called "journalism", with dozens of editors, I've never once heard of an editor checking a writer's *facts*. That's usually impossible, for one thing. What are they going to do, return to the scene of primary reportage by turning back time? Re-interview the reporter's sources? Get an advanced degree that duplicate's the writer's?

      The rest of your post exhibits the same Making Shit Up school of knowledge. You should be ashamed of yourself.

      --
      Tom Geller
  7. The truth will never be known by bl8n8r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No matter how many people speak out the "truth", there have been so many wildly different stories and claims that everything automatically gets tagged as bullshit in everyone's mind.

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
    1. Re:The truth will never be known by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but it's out there :-P

    2. Re:The truth will never be known by HikingStick · · Score: 1

      I wish I hadn't commented on another post in this thread, because I would have had moderator points to flag your comment as [+1 Insightful]

      --
      I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    3. Re:The truth will never be known by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Except the truth IS KNOWN. there are no more secrets about what happened. IT's a very mundane and boring explanation but people who make money sling shit just ignore it, or make an ad hom attack against the theory and then ignore all responses.

      How the russians would have gotten this craft their isn't explained, nor is it explained why the Russians would be using Scotch Tape, and american tape with flowers printed on it is ignored. Like all inconvienant facts people with an emotional tie to in idea tend to ignore.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:The truth will never be known by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      No matter how many people speak out the "truth", there have been so many wildly different stories and claims that everything automatically gets tagged as bullshit in everyone's mind.

      It's a pity that said calling of bullshit doesn't happen more often.

    5. Re:The truth will never be known by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No matter how many people speak out the "truth", there have been so many wildly different stories and claims that everything automatically gets tagged as bullshit in everyone's mind.

      And that my friends, is what desinformation is all about

    6. Re:The truth will never be known by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, bullshit!!

  8. Seriously? by Hitch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm more willing to believe it was an actual UFO.
    And I don't believe in Alien UFOs.

    This is the most convoluted conspiracy theory I've heard since the "9/11 was perpetrated by the US" and "Obama's Birth Certificate" nutjobs

    --
    You see, without that little doohicky, the universe stops.
    http://propheteer.org
    1. Re:Seriously? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

      So given all the improbabilities involved in interstellar travel, you think that's more likely than one government fucking with another, and expending great resources in which to do it?

      I'm afraid I have some bad news for you about how the world works...

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    2. Re:Seriously? by PuckSR · · Score: 1

      I actually agree with you. I am more willing to believe actual aliens landed than this story.
      This is probably as crazy as the "9/11 was an inside job" nutjobs, but not as crazy as the "Obama Birth certificate" nutjobs. The birthers were more denialists. They just didn't want to believe a single fact and believed people might be covering up. They were not specific concepts that were massively convoluted and questionable in motive. I would compare the birthers to JFK conspiracy theorists. I would also put "aliens landed at roswell" in the same camp.

  9. It's a shame... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's a shame that the stuff at the end (Stalin smuggled Josef Mengele out of Nazi Germany in the closing days of WWII so that he could surgically/genetically alter 13 year old kids to look like aliens for the purpose of starting a panic in the US that would delay the response to a preemptive Soviet attack- really?) will discredit what otherwise seems to be a well sourced history of cold-war research.

  10. Hmmm. by joltguy · · Score: 2

    An actual alien crash landing is almost more believable than this "explanation".

  11. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH by unity100 · · Score: 0

    the crap that is told by that book, is less believable than extraterrestrial visitors.

    ironic that this shit came out a short while after fbi ufo disclosure (right or wrong) news hit the major news outlets.

    aliens may be there, or not, but, THIS is the most incompetent piece of disinformation that can ever be attempted. 'child size aviators' my ass.

    1. Re:HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH by snookiex · · Score: 2

      I could buy that if it wasn't for the "altered by captured Nazi doctors to appear more frightening" part :P

      --
      Open Source Network Inventory for the masses! Kuwaiba
  12. Not even pointing fingers at a democracy... by Shoten · · Score: 1

    Holy crap...the most batshit-crazy theory yet to explain Roswell, and it doesn't even point to a consipracy by our own government, or a shadow organization? Who would have thought?

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    1. Re:Not even pointing fingers at a democracy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i heard an interview with the author and actually she does claim that once we saw the Russians doing this, we began our own human experiments to mimic what they had done to us. we can be leaving the US out of such wild conspiracies.

    2. Re:Not even pointing fingers at a democracy... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Actually it does. And it's the stupidest 'theory' ever based on...well... nothing.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Not even pointing fingers at a democracy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy crap...the most batshit-crazy theory yet to explain Roswell

      Please, enlighten us as to how "fake aliens" is a crazier theory than "real aliens".

    4. Re:Not even pointing fingers at a democracy... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Crazy or not, it was clear that the US public at the time was easily panicked. The Soviets were amused at the War of the Worlds incident, and the UFO hysteria had just taken off. The US government did not like this hysteria and they would want to downplay this if it had occurred. The rationale to do this make sense, the part that seems to fall down the most is the aircraft that vaguely resembles a saucer made by some German brothers, I'm sure some pictures and evidence of this would be out there.

  13. if the Soviets were behind it, by kubitus · · Score: 1

    they would have made it public for a worldwide haha on the US!

    1. Re:if the Soviets were behind it, by geekoid · · Score: 1

      She claims that our government didn't say anything because we decided to do it after finding out the Russian did it. As if that has any gain over coming out and telling people look what the reds did!

      And she sidesteps the issue of how the Russians got a craft there.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  14. Don't kill the messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Despite the claims being crazy, if the author is to be believed, all she did was take the claims of people who were working at Area 51 at the time and wrote a book on what they said to her. Blame those guys.

    1. Re:Don't kill the messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blame those guys.

      Sometimes I imagine a bunch of nerds in a retirement home trying to one-up each other in terms of the funniest cover story they got some over-inquisitive reporter to buy into.

      "UFOs piloted by aliens! Top that!"
      "I'll see your space aliens and raise you Russian midgets pretending to be using Nazi flying wings in order to pretend to be space aliens!"
      "Wow, someone actually went for that. OK, you win, beers are on me tonight."

      Blame those guys? I thank those guys. They brought us civilians moments of hilarity even while doing deadly serious work, even if 50 years later, they can only smile to themselves at a job well done.

    2. Re:Don't kill the messenger by rudy_wayne · · Score: 1

      if the author is to be believed, all she did was take the claims of people who were working at Area 51 at the time and wrote a book on what they said to her. Blame those guys.

      No, I blame the author, who wrote a book based entirely on 100% unsubstantiated, unverified nonsense.

    3. Re:Don't kill the messenger by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      Perception and memory are interesting aspects of human psychology. It doesn't have to involve intentional deception to get inaccurate accounts. Eye witnesses do not always provide trustworthy accounts of situations - especially when they only have a limited view of the situation. Bias can greatly skew interpretation of events. And then add on several decades of distance between the event and the retelling of the story to allow some details to fade and become fuzzy and the biased perceptions to remain the only pieces of memory.

    4. Re:Don't kill the messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I guess it's fair to criticise the messenger for volunteering to give out messages from crazy people.

  15. Hear her out by just_another_sean · · Score: 4, Informative

    She was on the daily show last week; she seemed pretty sane, even if her story doesn't... Judge for yourself.

    --
    Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    1. Re:Hear her out by arazor · · Score: 1

      She was on the daily show last week; she seemed pretty sane, even if her story doesn't... Judge for yourself.

    2. Re:Hear her out by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Sanity isn't really the question. On OPB she clearly had huge holes in her story, and when pressed it was pretty clear she has nothing to base this on.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Hear her out by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      She was on the daily show last week; she seemed pretty sane, even if her story doesn't... Judge for yourself.

      Many authors are completely sane - including the ones who write fiction.

    4. Re:Hear her out by hoytak · · Score: 1

      Ah.... a nice example of knowing what would sell.

      In other words, she doesn't have to believe it to understand how people think about this, and it's likely a lot of readers will see it as a work of fiction, buy it, and be entertained. In other words, she seems successful as an author here.

      --
      Does having a witty signature really indicate normality?
    5. Re:Hear her out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She also appeared on ABC Nightline yesterday. She seemed very very skittish and not so sane. She kept defending the Soviet NAZI children in a flying saucer story.

      The interviewer repeatedly asked her for other sources or physical evidence. She always said the one Area 51 employee was enough. That's not good journalism, or research of any kind.

      The USA reverse engineered NAZI V1 rockets, jet aircraft, & plenty more. Clearly, we would have done the same to a viable flying saucer.

    6. Re:Hear her out by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Some author who's selling a book makes unsupported claims in order to sell aforementioned book.

      Why is this on slashdot?

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  16. Fantastically stupid by JMZero · · Score: 2

    This narrative doesn't make sense for any of the players involved. The only way you see the plastic-surgeried child pilot is if you're deliberately crashing the thing - at which point it is clear to the people picking it up it's "normal" technology and the child is clearly a clumsily mutilated (even modern plastic surgery is not going to conceal this kind of thing) human. It would have also been immediately clear who did it, why it isn't scary aliens, and it would have been reasonably hard to do (requires launching a plane deep into the US). It also wouldn't make much sense to keep secret - the message is simple: the Russians are weird douchebags who sent a over a plane with a dead kid.

    Contrast that with another, significantly-less-crazy-but-still-pretty-crazy plan that could have actually worked: Have a weird formation of small planes with blinking lights. Send them around at night to New York. If you want, maybe blow up the Statue of Liberty with an unconventional mix of explosives while shining a big light on it or something. Get a whole bunch of weird coincidence stuff going too, broadcast strange radio messages and have it happen in correspondence with some astrological phenomenon. Then get out real fast before they can find your planes, and see that they have conventional propulsion systems and human pilots.

    Anyways, I'm sure you or I could do better than the above stupid plan with a little time to think it out (heck, a rope and a cornfield works pretty good). Imagining that the Russians, with plenty of time to think through a plan that required significant commitment, couldn't do better than mutilated kid crashing a plane in the desert... is just so very dumb. I think the only people dumb enough to accept it would be the morons who already have an "explanation" (ie. those who believe it was aliens).

    --
    Let's not stir that bag of worms...
    1. Re:Fantastically stupid by HikingStick · · Score: 1

      1) The account seems pretty clear that the intention was to crash one, to prove to the US military that they (the Russians) could cause a nation-wide UFO scare.

      2) Flying disk technology was considered advanced technology in that day, as flying wing technology was still being tested.

      I'm not fully convinced of the truthfulness of the account, but it seems far more plausible than a covered-up alien encounter.

      --
      I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    2. Re:Fantastically stupid by domatic · · Score: 1

      Or just release a bunch of prank balloons:

      http://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/candbal.htm

      Note: Don't actually use this design; they can start fires. I bet some great prank balloons could be made from flashing LED light toys and helium balloons.

    3. Re:Fantastically stupid by JMZero · · Score: 1

      The account seems pretty clear that the intention was to crash one, to prove to the US military that they (the Russians) could cause a nation-wide UFO scare.

      To cause a scare, why not, uh, let their UFO get caught flying on film (hopefully doing things that only their advanced aircraft could do). Again, if I was trying to fake this, I'd do it at night with a formation of planes (thus appearing larger than a plane could be, or - using tricks of perspective and a formation moving faster than planes could move). Crashing one proves only one thing: that they couldn't fake a crash site well enough to fool anyone. How do I know their crash evidence wouldn't be good enough to fool anyone? Because you still couldn't do a crash that would fool anyone, at least not by starting with a plane that could fly in that era and a human pilot.

      Flying disk technology was considered advanced technology in that day, as flying wing technology was still being tested.

      If you're trying to make a good crash site - why make it fly at all? Again, if I was doing a fake crash site, I'd leave out the human (which is an obvious, stupid tell that only a fantastic moron would think of or try) and just have a big disk with layers of odd metal. Have a bunch of magnets, glass spheres, crystals, long antennas made of strange plastic, and generally weird crap in there, all intricate and incomprehensible. Then drop the whole deal out of a plane.

      Again, the starting plot doesn't make any sense, and requires a lot of commitment for something that obviously wasn't going to do anything (at least not anything more than just flying around a weather balloon would).

      I'm not saying my stupid ideas would work either. But they at least aren't guaranteed not to work (as this stupid, stupid plan would be), and they have some hope of not being discovered in an embarrassing way. Give the Russians some credit - if they'd wanted to do something like this (which they, uh, wouldn't because it's a fantastically dumb goal to start with) then they could have come up with something much better.

      --
      Let's not stir that bag of worms...
  17. Sounds OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another get money and run book, but it is plausible at least.

  18. So that's ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Conspiracy Theory^2.

  19. Whoosh by Greyfox · · Score: 1, Interesting

    That really isn't the story here, and she pretty much says that in all the interviews I've heard with her. The story is the fact that the organization behind Area 51, the US Department of Energy, can classify information so tightly that no one in the US Government (Including the President) could be deemed to have a "need to know" to see it. They are unaccountable and outside any system of checks and balances. Of course, that alone doesn't sell books so I can see why she trotted out the freak show.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Whoosh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The story is the fact that the organization behind Area 51, the US Department of Energy, can classify information so tightly that no one in the US Government (Including the President) could be deemed to have a "need to know" to see it

      Or the DoE has no such ability, and the only reason nobody has ever been able to see this "information" is because there's no such information to see beyond the rather mundane and the now widely reported stories regarding weather/spy balloons. Even if there was still a hidden truth behind this, how do you know what the President or any other high-level official has seen? Right, you don't. Your "real story" is as much a conspiracy theory as the UFO crash itself.

    2. Re:Whoosh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, thats crazy talk there is No Such Agency within the Government that does that. Greyfox is obviously a Pinko Commie.

    3. Re:Whoosh by westlake · · Score: 1

      The story is the fact that the organization behind Area 51, the US Department of Energy, can classify information so tightly that no one in the US Government (Including the President) could be deemed to have a "need to know" to see it.

      Trash that video of "Independence Day" and get back to taking your meds.

    4. Re:Whoosh by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Don't conflate Area 51 with Roswell. The conspiracy theorists tie them together but Area 51 itself is involved with top secret research having nothing to do with the UFO story.

  20. Not quite... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "by a single unnamed source, who she describes as one of only five engineers given full access to the crash debris at the top-secret facility in Nevada known as Area 51."

    Except that the crash debris was taken to the so-called "Hangar 18" at Wright Patterson AFB in Ohio and Area 51 was a bombing range in 1947. It wasn't until 1955 until they started doing stuff there... oops...

  21. Obligatory UHF Quote by supersloshy · · Score: 2

    "Lesbian Nazi hookers abducted by aliens and forced into weight-loss programs. All next week on Town Talk"
              - George Newman (Weird Al Yankovic), UHF

    --
    "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    1. Re:Obligatory UHF Quote by supersloshy · · Score: 1

      "Lesbian Nazi hookers abducted by UFOs and forced into weight-loss programs. All this week on Town Talk"

      Fixed that for myself. Also, here's a 10-second clip of the quote (SFW)

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
  22. I heard an interview with her by geekoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    CLearly she stopped applying all thought when she talked about child altered surgically and/or genetically.

    In fact, in order to use emotions to make her claims more believable, she changes from a proper journals 3rd person writting to a 1 person writing.

    IT's crap. Complete hearsay. She also made the classic blunder of people who start to buy in to this kind of lunacy: Made up security clearances.

    At one point she said:
    My source remains anonymous because he is afraid of what will happen. He is the last remaining engineer on a 5 man tame.
    As if that wouldn't give him away to the very people she claims he is afraid of.

    "Gosh Bob, we would shut this person up, be he is anonymous. We do know he was on the uber top secret project with pal;id levels security, and we know he's the only surviving member. But Who can it be?"

    When pressed she started making up crazier and wider reaching 'theories'. I mean she was told by some guy who claim to have been on some project, and then uses the Ad ignorantiam ad the 'argument from authority' logical fallacies.

    IT';s kind of sad. Watching a good journalist get sucked in like that.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:I heard an interview with her by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      IT';s kind of sad. Watching a good journalist get sucked in like that.

      What makes you think she is a good journalist or sucked in?

      The most logical explanation is that she knows what she is doing. It would explain the consistent form-change, and the over-the-top conspiracy theory that would guarantee her free publicity and probably even make people who thinks it sounds stupid, buy the book, in order to find out where it is coming from, or to have laugh.

      Sounds to me more like an evil journalist than a good journalist.

  23. Almost... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, I was going along with the theory until we got to "'child-size aviators' surgically altered by captured Nazi doctors".

  24. Crap by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2

    I recently heard an interview with Annie Jacobsen and this book is a huge load of crap. It's all based on third-hand information ("I was told by someone, who was told by someone...."). She claims that the aircraft was being remotely piloted by the Soviets and contained people, who appeared to be 12-13 years old, who had been genetically engineered by Josef Mengele (who went to work for the Soviets after the end of WWI) to look like aliens.. Of course she had no explanation of how Mengele genetically engineered a few 12-13 year old people in the 2 years between the end of WWII and the crash at Roswell. Not to mention the fact that the knowledge and technology for genetic engineering didn't exist at that time. She never did answer questions about the people in the aircraft -- did the US recover them? Were they alive? Were they dead? She just changed the subject and started talking about something else.

    The entire interview was nothing but weasel words and lots of backpedaling whenever she was asked about specific details.

    1. Re:Crap by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      She doesn't claim this, she is quoting a source that she explicitly says is just a source with no substantiated evidence behind the claims. She doesn't have the details because she is just relaying information. She does not claim that this is true either. It's just a tacked on section at the end of a much longer book.

      Personally I think it could have been left off but she included it in order to increase sales of the book. So there's the ethical question here. She switches from 3rd to 1st person explicitly to denote that she's no longer being a journalist in this chapter, but is that enough to avoid the ethical question that arises by sticking sensationalism in at the end of an otherwise normal journalistic book? This is sort of like writing a well researched book about the Apollo program and then putting in an appendix about someone who claims to have been in on the moon landing hoax.

  25. No Certainly Not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Roswell was a part of my family lore because a relative was with Army Air Force Intelligence at Roswell. Heard all about it since I was a very wee fellow. No, this new book is phoney baloney. Oh .. based on all accounts I heard over the years cannot confirm personally it was UFO or of alien manufacture. Relative certainly did think so. Said so on his death bed. Very strange event.

  26. Wreckage was sent to Wright-Patterson Hangar 18 by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    Was Area 51 even a facility back then? Whatever they recovered from Roswell went to "Hangar 18" - an environmental test facility at Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton, OH.

    Even most skeptics agree on that (regardless of what they thought was recovered).

    Anybody claiming Area 51 involvement in the Roswell incident instantly loses all credibility.

  27. Find the book in the Fiction section... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because that is largely what it is, fiction.

    Sad to see a moderately successful writer of average competence complete such a sad, misleading work.

    Even the "New Right" doesn't spout much as flawed as what Jacobsen has done with her book.

    15 minutes of fame- successful
    Lifelong damage to credibility-absolutely.

  28. I'm amazed.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, not by the claims, but by the linked article.

    I'm just impressed there's a site out there that's slower and more processor intensive than /.

  29. Listen to the Fresh Air Interview by psyclone · · Score: 1

    She specifically warns the reader that she changed to the first person to give an accurate account from that single source (mentioned in the summary). Since she only had once source for that information, and the information appears to be extreme if even partially true, she told his story in a different way.

    The Fresh Air interview with Terry Gross:
    http://www.npr.org/2011/05/17/136356848/area-51-uncensored-was-it-ufos-or-the-ussr

    Listen or Download link is right at the top.

  30. As fun as slandering people is... by KingSkippus · · Score: 1

    As fun as slandering people is, two notes should probably be kept in mind. First, the vast majority of the book is about research told to her by multiple sourced first-hand accounts of what was going on at Area 51. As in, non-conspirational yet still interesting stuff. Second, as a commenter above noted, this is not Annie Jacobsen's crazy theory on what was happening. She took special pains to point out that this was a story directly recounted to her from someone who was supposedly directly involved, unfiltered by her bias. In fact, if I recall correctly, she actually says at some point that she thinks the whole story is highly unlikely.

    Unfortunately, the media loves a good sensationalist story, so out of the whole book, this is the one extremely minor thing picked out of it to publicize, and people are trying to cast Annie Jacobsen in the light of the crackpot theorist.

    How about actually finding out more about her and the book next time before you go maligning people like this? Oh, right. Because the media isn't the only one who loves a good sensationalist story.

    1. Re:As fun as slandering people is... by lexsird · · Score: 1

      That is all fine and dandy, but anyone can go interview lunatics and come up with "research" and something that resembles a "story". What next, run to the nursing homes and start "documenting" and "researching"? I have a father who has Parkinsons and he will give you all sorts of "first hand accounts" of how "aliens have infected our blood supplies" and how he is still on a secret mission for Jack Kennedy. Sweet Jesus, I should be writing this all down and making bank on a book to the retards in today's reading clime.

      Seriously, as much as geeks want it to be so, Area 51, Roswell and Aliens, Russians and all the trimmings does NOT make for real journalism. Its pandering to the lunatic fringe for money, simple as that. Its not only pathetic and sad, but it also raises moral questions as to should people feed rumors that obviously aren't conducive to good mental health for those who are deluded by it. Way to reinforce these lunatics by giving them any ink.

      --
      Take the Red Pill.
  31. Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This book is plain rubbish. I can't believe she got published with such attention, let alone almost a full hour on NPR.

  32. -Sigh- not again by sproketboy · · Score: 1

    Roswell explained:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2334857802602777622&ei=DoRESannBJLAqAL5p7z4DA&q=physics

    This is a lecture on physics a Berkeley. It will take an hour but it explains the Roswell UFO stuff and why it was classified.
    More fascinating IMO than aliens....

  33. Excuse me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the famous 1947 UFO sightings in Roswell

    Sorry, what UFO sightings? Does a crashed something-or-other even count as a sighting?

  34. Doesn't even make historical sense... by mrbrown1602 · · Score: 1

    I watched the Nightline report on this book last night. Ms. Jacobsen claims that Josef Mengele was working with Stalin and the Soviets, developing these alien-looking children.

    Josef Mengele, after WW2, was captured by the United States while he was FLEEING the Soviets. He used a fake name and was in a POW camp for a while, was released, and then escaped to Buenos Aires care of the ODESSA network, where he remained until the 1980s.

    So, historically speaking, her story makes no sense.

    1. Re:Doesn't even make historical sense... by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      I believe you can watch the nightline episodes online.. and it's also available as a free audio podcast.

  35. Flying Wings, Child-size aviators: The Turk? by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

    Flying wings, piloted by child-sized aviators ... makes me think of the The Turk, piloted by a child-sized chess master.

    --
    -kgj
  36. Weird alloys by mangu · · Score: 2

    I remember i once read an article in a magazine that someone had recovered a piece of metal from the Nevada desert and had it analyzed. The author claimed this particular alloy was unknown on earth and gave the composition, i remember it had a particularly high nickel content.

    My father was a mechanical engineer and I consulted his data books (this was around 1980, no wikipedia or google). I found an alloy that was very close to what was printed in that article, it happened to be a stainless steel designed for use in high temperatures.

    So, the guy found a piece of a broken jet turbine near an air force proving grounds, went to all the trouble to have it analyzed, only to conclude it came from aliens...

  37. Jest bcoz da book be nyoo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...don't mean it have the latest information.

  38. Sounds like a cheesy video game plot by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    ...did anyone else immediately get that idea?

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  39. Wrong, wrong and wrong by El_Furioso · · Score: 1

    If you've read the book, or heard her discuss the book at length you might be a bit more informed to make comments. She -does not- make these claims on her own, nor does she report it third hand. She reports it as an addendum to the, most likely true, accounts of what the UFO's at Area 51 actually were ... experimental aircraft. The 'conspiracy' theory was not a leap of logic, it was a journalistic account told from an immediate source who supposedly worked on the 'alien' crash at Roswell. Don't jump to conclusions about the book, or the contents therein just because -you- do or don't believe in what happened or what you think about a 5 minute interview on a comedy t.v. show.

  40. What panic? by Big+Smirk · · Score: 1

    If I remember the history of the Roswell incident is that it made the news long after everything was cleaned up. Decades later did the stories come out about coverup and what people really saw.

    --
    TODO: create/find/steal funny sig.
    1. Re:What panic? by Orffen · · Score: 1

      IIRC, the local PR officer initially told the papers a flying disc had crashed and been recovered. Then a day or so later a higher-up said it wasn't a disc but a weather balloon. I would assume the consipracy theories would have started around then.

  41. MIB using Global warming to take over the world!!! by Eclipse-now · · Score: 1
    Climate change is all a Conspiracy organised by the M.I.B. who killed J.F.K, faked the moon landing and stole the alien aircraft from Area 51!!!

    But I’m here to stop them! I will now reveal to the world the presence of this infamous font of infamy! The M.I.B. are actually the Mason’s in Black. You can learn all about them if you just buy my upcoming book, Why climate change is crap and you must fear the M.I.B. instead for just $29.95.

    If you like Why climate change is crap you might also enjoy the sequels,

    More about the M.I.B,
    What you can do about the M.I.B.,
    How to survive the coming M.I.B. take-over,
    Another 100 reasons climate change is rubbish and your local CSIRO lab have also been brought out by the M.I.B., and finally,
    How the M.I.B. fabricated the laws of physics on a universal scale to trick every spectrometer and science student in every lab across the planet, ever. No really. (This last title is a little long but my publishers say it appeals to a very specific market. One has to pay the bills, and what the heck is wrong with that?)

    You’ll probably want to buy the boxed set for only $100. It’s all good science, you can trust me. The fact that I couldn’t get my works published in the peer-reviewed journals only proves how far the M.I.B. have come! Once they have control of our minds, the Rubber Duck underwear laws are soon to follow.

  42. psycho by decarillion · · Score: 1

    I heard her on NPR last week. She's nuts :)

  43. Marcel & DuBose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All theories about Roswell need to address questions but don't. Why did Marcel & DuBose say what they did? Did they tell the truth? Did they lie? If you look at it from a simple standpoint it gets real easy.

    1) They told the truth and we have been and are being visited by advanced non-human races.

    2) They lied. This one gets a bit murky but it also makes sense. Why lie? Maybe they were ordered to? There was a cold war going on and if the Soviets thought we had super advanced technology it might put a crimp in their plans. Lets face it both were high ranking military men who served at the place and time the events happened. So they are old and near the end of life and someone from the DoD talks to them and says "one last time we need you to help out". They say what they are told to.

    Given the other people in the area who also corroborate parts of their story it is either the best done pysop in history or they were telling the truth. I lean towards #1 but I'm open to other explanations. This current one ranks up there with the Japanese balloon bomb BS and is even less credible than the government's explanations. We may never know. I leave this discussion with the words of Ben Rich circa 1993.

    "Anything you can imagine we already know how to do. We can travel to the stars."

    Cheers

  44. Re:Not really that stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am always amazed at how easy the people absorb the disinformation that has been thrown in their lap. Blaming things on the Russians is not a new concept, remember the cold war and the "Duck and cover" training. The truth is far more fantastic, and the security measures utilized to keep such secrets, extremely serious. We are not alone on the 3rd rock, the "big trailer park" of this side of the galaxy. However, you might be better off NOT knowing, Keeping in mind that everything you think you know about such "Alien technology", is already obsolete by over 50 years before it is allowed to become declassified, and entered into the public sector. This might be a good thing when you consider who is in control of earthy affairs, the massive corruption, how the planet resources are being abused, and their track record to date.
        Think about this for a few minutes: Who would believe you if you were one of those who were selected, and making contact? How would you share their important Alien message with the world, without looking like a guest on Jerry Springer show? Do you think that dealing with something so intelligent, so advanced, and so powerful would be a fun experience? Oh, come on now, even if you had a real dead Alien sitting in your freezer, "they" would just report it to the news it was a shaved monkey, and another hoax along with the big foot and crop circle people. This is important part: Would such abnormal events such as Alien contact add anything to YOUR piece of mind, or personal life, or just get you some government approved medications?
    Here is why you don't know: http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/sf312.html, and for those interested enough to turn off the brainwashing TV box, http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526 .....Perhaps, this is why YOU pay others to loose sleep over such things, and why YOU still can sleep at night.