Project Mogul is NOT the Cause of the Roswell Incident

"... the crash was not the product of any of these items. All those references were unnecessary as the item found was not your ordinary weather balloon, and we should not be surprised that people did not know what produced the debris." The voters can compare for themselves: Mogul Diagram: http://www.csicop.org... Newspaper Reference: http://www.roswellproof.com... Rawin radar targets would be the only constituent element to be described as metallic foil-like debris. The metallic foil-like debris with memory metal properties as well as cut, tear and burn resistance is what mystified all witnesses initially (among other things after a more thorough search). I stated in Round 2 that radar targets were used in meteorological packages of the time, like those launched from the Roswell weather department 4 times a day. Example images: 1. http://www.roswellproof.com... 2. http://www.roswellproof.com... 3. http://www.roswellproof.com... Rawin radar target used for Mogul: http://www.csicop.org... "Dr. Galganski is an engineer and a _UFO buff_." [my emphasis] Irrelevant ad hominem innuendo. Very murky label. For example, an advocate of an extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) arrived upon after careful investigation and scientific analysis should not be lumped in the same basket as cultists and fanatics who rely on faith. "His work has been questioned considerably and his analysis, provided by my opponent's source, is not indicative of professional work." The Con's source discounts Marcel's estimate by cherry picking Brazel's (altered) estimate of the size of the debris field. Family, friends and neighbors reported that Brazel was detained and fed a new story. This was also supported by KGFL radio host Frank Joyce. (details and supporting testimony can be found in Witness to Roswell available online here: http://www.scribd.com...) Nickell's rhetorical question of the debris field of the Space Shuttle Columbia is irrelevant given that a Space Shuttle has a higher trajectory and is composed of way more material. Exponentially larger surface area. A Mogul balloon also has considerably less mass and would not break up in the atmosphere. It should be noted that the Discovery Channel program cited by Nickell conducted an experiment by creating a PM replica and shot it down. It was one of the few good points in the program. I encourage everyone to view the end of the show and decide whether it could be mistaken for a "flying disc" by anyone let alone the base commander of the RAAF. Nickell also left out Galganski's analysis of the glue coated balsa wood struts. Nuclear Physicist Stanton T. Friedman provided a rebuttal of the Con's article that can be read here: http://www.v-j-enterprises.com... It should be noted that Mogul Flight #4 according to Dr. Albert P. Crary's log, was never even launched. All we have to rely on for the launch of Fight 4 is Moore's word. So just how reliable is Moore's word? Well, Moore had previously shown mathematically, using historical wind data, that Mogul Flight #4 would have "exactly landed" on the Foster ranch. However, as it turns out, Moore hoaxed his flight trajectory; that is, unless 100/12.1=350 (http://roswellproof.homestead.com... & http://roswellproof.homestead.com...). Moore has never voiced a rebuttal, but then again, how could he? No matter what you say or do, you can't argue that 1+1=3. However, debunkers Dave Thomas and Tim Printy (of CSICOP) came to Moore's rescue attacking David Rudiak (the investigator that pointed out the mathematic errors of Moore's flight trajectory) calling him incompetent, among other things (http://roswellproof.homestead.com...). With that, you would assume Thomas and Printy had a way of countering the mathematical errors, but alas they did not. Instead, they argued that Moore was "qualitatively right," perhaps admitting his quantitative errors. Sorry, but facts are facts. Voters should note that CSICOP is not a disinterested third party. Moore claimed PM was so "Top Secret" that he didn't even know the name of the project. This was a lie. The following unclassified document was written in 1949 and specifically mentions Project Mogul by name: http://roswellproof.com... Moore knew of the letter as it came from his own files. According to the annotations on it, Moore reviewed that letter in 1969. Dr. Crary also noted the name of PM in his diary, available to all project members, on December 11, 1946 that was cited in the Air Forces own Roswell Report released in 1995. (In Section 17, Journal Transcripts, Albert P. Crary, April 2 1946 - May 8, 1946 and December 2, 1946 - August 16, 1947) Other debunkers point to the Ramey photographs (http://www.crystalinks.com...) as proof of the fact that the material that was recovered was indeed a conventional rawin radar target. However, witnesses such as Thomas Jefferson Dubose, Ramey's Chief of Staff, reported that the material was switched. There is some dispute over this, as according to Jaime Shandera, Dubose said the material wasn't switched. The problem is, Shandera did not record the interview, nor did he take notes. It is purely by his recollection. To the contrary, Dubose stated specifically in a 1991 affidavit that the material was in fact switched, and that the weather balloon story was a cover up. This is in writing, and on tape. Both Dubose's affidavit and recorded testimony can be found here: http://roswellproof.homestead.com... Dubose also reiterated these statements in an interview with reporter Billy Cox , Florida Today, 11/24/91, requoted in Timothy Good, Beyond Top Secret, p. 465. There are also conflicting reports about whether Marcel said the material in the photographs in Ramey's office were of the material that was recovered. Investigators William Moore and Jaime Shandera also stated that Marcel recalled that the debris photographed consisted of parts of the actual debris found at the Foster ranch. This is consistent with the story Moore and Shandera were pushing for at the time. The problem isn't Marcel or Dubose, but Moore and Shandera's reporting. Mrs. Dubose also confirmed the fact that Shandera didn't even bother to take notes. Moore provided three separate versions of the same interview with Marcel, that had not been recorded on audio or video, or even written down. When shown one of the photographs printed in the Air Force's Roswell Report, Marcel replied, "No. No. That picture was staged. That's not the stuff I brought home." This exchange was not reported by a Roswell believer, or skeptic, but a disinterested third party source, Johnny Mann. The exchange was also witnessed by Julian Krajewski. Linda Corley also interviewed Marcel in 1980 and got the same response on tape, that the material photographed was not the material that was found. Further discussion of these discrepancies can be found here: http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com... One final bit of evidence pushed by the debunkers is the FBI Roswell document (http://foia.fbi.gov...) stating that "the object found resembles a high altitude weather balloon with a radar reflector ... disc and balloon being transported" Colonel Richard Weaver used this document as evidence to support the Air Force's conclusion in the Roswell Report that what was recovered was indeed a balloon. Of course, Weaver intentionally left out the rest of the sentence after "reflector" that read, "but that telephonic conversation between their office and Wright Field had not borne out this belief." It's easy to see why Weaver & Co. did not include the document as part of their report.