From: Jack Brewer <brewer.jack.nul> Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 19:37:38 -0700 (PDT) Archived: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 08:55:36 -0400 Subject: Re: Roswell Debris Sample Disappears En Route >From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> >Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 23:35:52 +0000 >Archived: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 08:27:33 -0400 >Subject: Re: Roswell Debris Sample Disappears En Route >If the sample has already been examined by Earth Tech's lab and >Bigelow's BAASS, what was the result of testing? Surely, two >quality labs' results should be enough to provide a good read >out. ASU's lab? Why? Hello, Kathy, I do not speak for Frank Kimbler, but I can provide a bit of insight into your questions. The original Open Minds article, sensationalized as it has been labeled in certain circles, may be viewed at: http://tinyurl.com/6335zmg The Open Minds article contains what I understand to be reasonably accurate information about Kimbler's efforts to obtain quality, professional analysis, including direct mention of BAASS. Related circumstances were also mentioned. You may find it helpful about your questions to review the article, Kathy, even though the conclusions presented are rather obviously premature and biased. Some of the inherent problems with initial analyses (and related to your questions) are ironically reflected by the prematurely conclusive nature of the Open Minds article. Such challenges were directly addressed by retired engineer Frank Purcell when he analysed data presented, and his analysis may be viewed at: http://tinyurl.com/3z9ccp4 It is my understanding that, according to Kimbler, numerous difficulties have been experienced in obtaining professional, objective analysis. It is my interpretation that available information up to this point suggests that to be accurate, and I have no reason to doubt Kimbler. It appears quite clear that additional analysis is required for a number of reasons, and as explained in Purcell's analysis. Such reasons of course include qualified peer review, quality control and maintaining objectivity in order to arrive at legitimate conclusions. My personal opinion, Kathy, is that I would like to see professional, objective analysis conducted by multiple qualified sources in order to establish details such as age and composition of the debris. I suspect doing so may provide an outside chance to actually take a reasonably good gander at what went down out there. Like, assuming the debris turns out to be quite earthly and man made, wouldn't you like to compare it to, say, Mogul balloon materials, among other things? I think there are any number of things about this unfolding story that are potentially very interesting. And if, as Kimbler says, it turns out to be a beer can, then so be it. In closing, I would like to request anyone that has direct insight into obtaining such analysis, particularly as it relates to analyzing milligrams of an alloy for isotopes, to please advise. Recommendation of labs and facilities would be greatly appreciated. Please contact me directly or comment at: http://tinyurl.com/3wc5a6f Thank you, Jack Brewer Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp