UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Nov > Nov 7

Re: MOGUL Mangled Math - Part 1

From: Tim Printy <TPrinty.nul>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 20:03:58 EST
Archived: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 12:44:55 -0400
Subject: Re: MOGUL Mangled Math - Part 1

>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Subject: Re: MOGUL Mangled Math - Part 1
>Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 12:44:38 -0800


>What we have here is a typical Printy diversion. The one who
>should be making a "clarification" here is Printy (or Moore).
>Why did Moore swap "Roswells" on us, replacing the base on the
>original plot with the town? Could it be so that it wasn't as
>obvious just how close Flight 5 actually passed to the base?

Same old tired argument. Moore plotted his map the way he
did. Feel free to ask him some time. I find it interesting that
you seem to think in 1995, he foresaw this argument that you
and Sparks were pushing forward.

>Instead, all that is noted here is an "X" marks-the-spot crash
>site and the words "ON GROUND". Again, look at the original
>plot. Printy is flagrantly lying here.

Is it an "X" or is it an arrow going towards a line? The
notation is somewhat confusing isn't it? I would be interested
in seeing the original and not the photocopy in the RAAF report.

>Nitpicking over whether Brad Sparks got the misplot mileage
>exact isn't important. The _real_ point is that Moore seriously
>misplotted the position.

Actually it is. You and Sparks direct your anger at Moore's
errors and then say it is ok for you to make obviously bogus
mistakes. You also proudly point out mistakes that you feel are
in my arguments/calculations but then it is OK for Sparks to
make obviously wrong and misleading measurements. Sounds
hypocritical to me.

>Incidentally, Printy actually places Moore's crash site about
>0.5-1.0 too close to these wells, Printy apparently having
>caught a little more "Mooreitis".

Actually, I plotted the point based on the values Moore had
listed in his table. I also stated the locations were
"approximate". Examining the values for flight #6's landing site
and RAAF in the NYU plots, it seems that the data team started
their flights at the center of Alamagordo AFB. However, Moore
seems to have used the actual launch point of the north hanger.
This explains why Roswell is about a mile to the west in his
graphic and many of the other landmarks are off if one uses the
center of the base. Moore, apparently unaware of this difference
accurately transcribed the path from figure 32 onto his map. As
a result, the plotted position on his map is now further from
Roswell than it should be. It measures about 30.5 miles but it
really was about 29.5 miles.

>What Printy _doesn't_ point out to you is that there was yet
>another oil well much closer in to Roswell, and very near the
>16-17 mile crash site marked on the original graphic.

Actually I do state the oil well is there. I think you need to
get your eyes checked because I stated in the line directly
below the map:

"Interestingly, the location shown on figure 32 does seem to be
near another oil well making one question both Crary's and
Moore's locations."

>That means there would also have been an unidentified plane in
>Roswell base airspace. But according to Printy, everybody at
>Roswell base was taking a siesta and totally unconcerned about
>such matters.

Was it in their airspace? Four miles is a long way. Most people
on these bases have their jobs to do. Can you specifically
identify which groups of individuals were assigned to monitor
the skies that day? Those working doing their daily tasks would
not be "skylarking" staring up at the sky.

>But in Printy FantasyLand, the same concern for security
>apparently didn't extend to their airspace. Nobody was watching
>and nobody cared if a strange balloon and an unidentified plane
>came within a few miles of the base.

You are confusing ground security with air security. There is a
difference you know. How many fighter planes were assigned to
RAAF for air protection? None as best I can tell. Were there an
Anti-Aircraft units assigned/deployed? None as best I can tell.
Was there an assigned observer corps setup on the base? I don't
know. Do you? It seems that there was little effort for air
security. Again, show us which groups (not vague references)
were assigned these tasks. Can you produce one report stating
they did see or report the flight.

Tim Printy

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com