From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:52:51 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:14:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Frank Kaufmann Exposed - Randle >From: Gildas Bourdais <email@example.com> >To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> >Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:55:29 +0100 >Subject: Re: Frank Kaufmann Exposed >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com> >>Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:35:12 EST >>To: email@example.com >>Subject: Re: Frank Kaufmann Exposed >>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@earthlink.net> >>>To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> >>>Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:02:05 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Frank Kaufmann Exposed >>>>From: Gildas Bourdais <email@example.com> >>>>Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:19:26 +0100 >>>>Fwd Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 12:54:21 -0500 >>>>Subject: Re: Frank Kaufmann Exposed - Bourdais ><snip> >>The big point here is if other investigations corroborate parts >>of the story, but we must also be aware of contamination. How >>much did Kaufmann know from those other sources... I know that >>he watched the Unsolved Mysteries segment because he talked >>about it having seen it. From that point on, he kept himself >>informed of about the latest in the Roswell case. Good Morning, Gildas, Dave, List, All - Before we start, let me ask a simple question. How many lies and how many forged documents must we discover before we decide that a witness is unreliable? No, I'm not referring to little mistakes that are the fault of memory tricks, but of honest to gosh lies and documents that were forged. >Kevin, >This is another interesting aspect of the Kaufmann problem. >Perhaps he came across some real information and began to >elaborate on them? Yes, it was on Unsolved Mysteries and he jumped right in. Oh, you mean official sources? Then he came across nothing. >I would like you to give your opinion now about the "impact >site", closer to Roswell. After the demise of both Ragsdale and >Kaufmann, what is left of it? Nothing. >I think there are some indirect testimonies, still standing, >about it? >And what do you think of the testimonies about bodies at the >Foster ranch? I mentioned that in my previous message. I forgot >to mention the source - a very interesting article - "Mack >Brazel Reconsidered" by Thomas Carey and Donald Schmit, in the >IUR of winter 1999, which told of the new revelations made by >Frank Joyce in 1998, that Brazel had seen the bodies. After all the years of saying one thing, supplying documents, and answering questions, suddenly, he is talking of Brazel seeing the bodies and providing detailed information. Please don't be offended if I'm skeptical. Ask Tom and Don about the grape soda and his ride out to the Brazel ranch with Whitmore or some of the more bizarre stories that Joyce has told over the years such as his adventures during a mountain fishing trip. >At the end of their IUR article, they mention other sources. >Wilcox's widow Inez who said that her husband "went out there to >the site. There was a big burned area, and he saw debris. It was >in the evening. There were "space beings"". (She did not give >the location, apparently) Actually, we don't know this. It was Inez's granddaughter who said that Inez said that George Wilcox had seen the big burned area and the debris. He sent deputies out... which means it was probably in Chavez County and not Lincoln County where the Brazel (Foster) ranch was located. But note that the information is third-hand at best. While the granddaughter is a nice woman and telling us what she believes to be the truth, when we filter data through so many witnesses, they are easily distorted. >A woman in Ruidoso remembered her husband coming back from a >detail to a ranch "up near Corona" where bodies had been found. >His clothes smelled very bad. Yes, this is all well and good, but there have also been aircraft accidents in the area. Tommy Tyree told us that during the Second World War an aircraft had crashed in the area and the teenagers from Corona knew where it had happened though the military had wanted to keep the site a secret. My point is that this tale told by a woman in Ruidoso does not specifically take us to the alien bodies... Interpretation has led us down the wrong path more than once. In their story, neither Carey nor Schmitt provides any evidence that this event is related to the crash of an alien ship. The bodies could just as easily be human as alien, and it is the woman's interpretation of the situation that is in error. There may be no way to ever learn if her late husband had been involved in the recovery of alien creatures or the unfortunate victims of an aircraft accident. >According to the family of the late Meyers Wahnee, who was a >pilot in Roswell, he told them that there were three separate >sites ! Bodies were found and first flown to Texas. "Decomposing >body parts" had been found among the debris at the Foster ranch. >BTW, Brazel complained to Joyce about the stench of the bodies. >I remember that, after your speech in Roswell in 1995, I >questioned your revised time line which seemed a bit short to >allow for such a decomposition, but you replied: "what do we >know about the decomposition of Et bodies?". Well, I still think >that these bodies would have been there a longer time. How long do you think they were there? Couldn't have been more than a couple of days, given everything else. And I ask again, just what do we know about the decomposition of an alien body? I can think of lots of reasons that an alien body might not decompose as quickly or in the same fashion as a human body. >Carey and Schmit also mention the last testimony of Loretta >Proctor, at the age of 81, who said that her son "Dee" took her >to visit a place where "something else" had been found, about >2.5 miles east-southeast of the debris field". Which is the site the Cliff Stone tried to feed us in 1989 which he said came from the Proctors. But, as I mentioned in another post, Loretta Proctor had introduced, in 1995, the idea that Mack Brazel had told her about the pink writing and this was the first time she had ever mentioned anything like that. So, I'm cautious about these new revelations that come so long after a witness has told the story of the crash time and again. We must be very careful here. >What do you think of all these testimonies? Given my recent track record, I'm not sure my take on these testimonies is all that important. I will point out that they are not first hand, but second hand at best. And I will point out that we have other testimony that is in conflict with it, from the story told by Melvin Brown to that of Frankie Rowe, none of which mentioned any sort of odor associated with the bodies. All I'm saying here is that we must proceed with caution because we have been badly burned in the past. KRandle
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
[ This Month's Index | UFO UpDates Main Index ]
UFO UpDates - Toronto -
Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp
A Hand-Operated E-Mail Subscription Service for the Study of UFO Related
To subscribe please send your first and last names to firstname.lastname@example.org
Message submissions should be sent to the same address.