Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Books

Blog powered by Typepad
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported

« Seeing Red in the Caribbean | Main | Jane Fonda and Her Friendly North Vietnamese Intelligence Officer »

11 July 2011

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834523b6869e2014e89629ba7970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dreamland Fantasies:

Comments

Stanton T. Friedman

As a nuclear physicist with two physics degrees from the University of Chicago and 14 years of experience working on classified advanced nuclear technology programs for GE, GM, Westinghouse Astronuclear Lab, Aerojet General Nucleonics, and as the original civilian investigator of the Roswell Incident and author or co-author of five books and having been to 20 archives, and lectured at more than 600 colleges and more than 100 professional groups, I certainly deny the notion of being a conspiracy theorist. Why are no books cited by those of us who have done serious and extended investigations as opposed to the proclamations by debunkers? They don't get dates and details about Roswell straight.They ignore the relevant evidence. I, too, have done a strongly negative review of "Area 51," but I cite facts not false proclamations. How about getting your facts straight guys?
Stanton T. Friedman

Kevin D. Randle

I’m sorry but I can’t let this pass. You suggest that Annie Jacobsen was less than careful in her research but fall into the same trap when you offer the Project MOGUL explanation for what fell outside Roswell (okay, Corona), New Mexico in 1947.

Project MOGUL was not classified in 1947. Dr. Albert Crary, the lead scientist, used the name “MOGUL” in his unclassified diary as printed by the Air Force. This disproves the statements by one of the project engineers, Charles Moore, that it was so highly classified they didn’t even know the name in 1947.

The equipment used for the MOGUL experiences was not some sort of new balloon (polyethylene) but were, in fact, off-the-shelf neoprene weather balloons and rawin radar reflectors, then in common use in New Mexico. Tying them together in a large array would certainly not inhibit the identification of the balloons and radar target by anyone, including the rancher who found it.

Dr. Crary’s diary suggests that flight number four, the culprit identified by the Air Force, did not fly as an experiment. It had been canceled. Charles Moore told me that when that happened, they stripped the equipment but let the balloons go because “they couldn’t put the helium back in the bottles.”

Those in Roswell knew about the experiments because, as Moore told me, they had gone to Roswell to explain what they were doing and ask for they help in tracking and recovering the balloons.

Not to mention that the CAA (forerunner to the FAA) required a NOTAM about the launches because the arrays could pose a threat to aerial navigation.

Pictures of the MOGUL launches appeared in the newspapers starting on 10 July 1947, which is a darn funny way to treat a highly classified project. (BTW, only the ultimate purpose was classified, not the experiments.)

I wonder why you have not put the Air Force reports under the same microscope with which you examined Jacobsen’s book. If you are to accuse her of not knowing her history, shouldn’t you be aware of the history you use against her? In other words, how is it that you have let the Air Force slip by with their cover story and you haven’t asked even the basic questions (Such as: How come they interviewed five men associated with MOGUL but didn’t even talk to those who were in Roswell and were involved with the recovery? These included two Air Force generals. And yes, I know why they didn’t talk to the generals.).

And, no, for the record, none of this proves that what fell outside Roswell was an alien ship, but then it does suggest that whatever it was, it was not a Project MOGUL balloon array.

Christopher Allan

I suggest anyone who wonders whether Stanton Friedman is indeed a conspiracy theorist reads just a few of his many papers on UFOs, as well as his books, particularly the one entitled "Top Secret Majic." They can then decide. It shouldn't take them long.

Stanton T. Friedman

I agree with Christopher Allan. Read my books "TOP SECRET/MAJIC," "Flying Saucers and Science," and "Crash at Corona," plus the articles posted at my website etc. I deal with facts and data and evidence, something about which he knows little. Investigation is required not blind proclamation. Norris and Richelson should turn their microscope on the Roswell USAF reports.They would find a great deal of misrepresentation.

Andy McDonald

Aside from the questionable factual accuracy of the book, I simply found it drawn out so thinly, with so much hyperbole, that it became unreadable. It reminded me of a reality show: the material never lives up to the hype, and there are no shortages of "coming up..." cliffhangers. From a writing standpoint, you could have easily cut a few hundred pages from it, but I supposed as time goes on, every "DEFINITIVE" Area 51 will need to be bigger, longer, and more uncut (read: unedited).

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Washington Decoded