The 'Truth' About Roswell?

Kevin D. Randle and Donald R. Schmitt. Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell. M. Evans, 1994.

The Roswell saga continues unabated with this the fourth book so far on the case (and this excludes the numerous papers and symposia reports that have appeared since the first book by Berlitz and Moore in 1980.)

If this book genuinely is "the truth" then the authors' first book of 1991 must be largely fiction by definition. In their current book there is one sentence that stands out above all else. It is the sentence that opens chapter 21: "This book is going to annoy a large number of people". Indeed it is! And not only sceptics but many dedicated believers too. In fact it has already prompted a renewed attack by other seasoned Roswell researchers, as well as a fresh and different approach (and giving a more prosaic solution) soon to appear in print by a newcomer named Karl T. Pflock. The current authors know all about Mr Pflock and even refer to him in their book but they avoid mentioning his name, preferring instead to call him "a former CIA employee" (p.179). It is clear that they strongly object to his meddling in the Roswell affair.

The book drastically changes the old 'established' scenario of a UFO crash at William (Mac) Brazel's ranch 75 miles north-west of Roswell on the night of July 2/3. 1947 and instead switches to a completely new 'primary' crash site with several bodies (including one live and walking ET) and loads of wreckage situated some 35 miles north of the town, which allegedly occurred early on the morning of July 5. The Brazel ranch is now merely the scene of a fall of some debris that had broken off from the spaceship just before the crash proper, and thus assumes only a minor role in the story.

This changed scenario has come about through the supposed persuasive testimony of some new witnesses who swear that the crash, which they claim to have seen first-hand, took place during the night of July 4/5. Moreover there is now a further surprise in that for the first time the authors have dug up evidence for radar confirmation of the event, from three different stations (!), something they had obviously missed in their first book.

Otherwise the mix is much the same as in the earlier book, with endless interviews with various local people, a few new ones with alleged first-hand experience, but mostly with those who had only the remotest connection with the original participants. There is still no hard evidence of any kind, be it wreckage, bodies or documentation. If you were not persuaded by the earlier Roswell books you certainly won't be by this one. If, on the other hand, you were so persuaded, then this one is likely to severely confuse and upset you.

Randle and Schmitt, throughout their investigations, have always assumed that there was 'safety in numbers', i.e. by collecting more and more witnesses, which must run into over 500 by now, however remote their connection with the original events, they are improving their case. In fact, as they will doubtless discover in the forthcoming battles, they have now gone over the top and probably destroyed what remaining credibility Roswell ever had.

To take just one example of how the authors work: they managed to track down a former archaeologist, Dr. W. Currey Holden, aged 96, who was allegedly leading an archaeological team at or very near the crash site that summer and who, the authors believe, could well have witnesses the UFO crash. Holden was interviewed, but his wife and daughter said he was easily confused. "Memories from his life were jumbled and re-ordered" (p.108). He had never once mentioned any saucer crash to them. In spite of this, the authors managed to extract an admission of sorts from Dr. Holden that "he had been there and had seen it all". When the authors then examined Holden's papers at Texas Tech University they found nothing about either a saucer crash or an archaeological dig at that period of time. All they found were three entries showing that he had written a cheque in Lubbock, Texas on July 3, had been invited to a wedding on July 8 and made a bank deposit on July 9.

No matter, with Roswell a mere "two or three hours away, and given the history of the region, there is no reason not to believe that he had been there" [i.e. at the crash site] (p.108). Randle and Schmitt are not concerned in the least that there is simply no record that the man was even doing any archaeological work at the time. Obviously Holden simply forgot to make any note in his papers that he had just witnessed such a mundane occurrence as a crashed extraterrestrial craft!

Many thousands of dollars have been expended by several investigators in recent years on this one case alone, without one scintilla of hard evidence ever being produced. Sadly, it is very much a case of putting all one's UFOs into one basket. The basket, alas, is still empty. . -- Reviewed by C. D. Allan, from Magonia 50, September 1994.


No comments: