Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Jun -> Re: RIPT & MJ-12

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 13:10:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 18:43:08 -0400
Subject: Re: RIPT & MJ-12


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 11:11:14 EDT
>Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 20:35:57 -0400
>Subject: Re: RIPT & MJ-12

>Here is the real important part of this posting. There are
>subjective judgments being made. We are interpreting what we see
>with a best guess regardless of the sophistication of the
>equipment.

Most of the message on casual inspection is ambiguous (about
80%), but some of it is not (about 20% of the words can be made
out without much difficulty).  There is near unanimity of
opinion  to certain words and phrases.  Furthermore, it is NOT a
case of everything goes.   Letter counts, spelling, and
grammatical rules of semantics and syntax greatly restrict the
number of interpretations that can be applied to the more
ambiguous sections. We may not be able to say with absolute
certainty that sections of the message say exactly this or that.
But we can certainly eliminate many interpretations and narrow
it down to a few likely possibilities.  The gist of the message
is generally pretty clear, even if some of the specifics (e.g.,
abbreviation of an unknown military unit being referred to) are
very much open to interpretation.

>We are interpreting the message in the context of the
>assumption that it relates to the Roswell case.

Of course, because it _obviously_ relates to the Roswell case
(see below).  Context is a valuable tool used by cryptographers,
or photointerpreters, or whomever, trying to pull out a signal
partially buried in noise.  Human language is inherently
ambiguous even in the best of circumstances.  Humans apply
context all the time to disambiguate meaning.  And the noisier
the situtation, the more context is applied.  Common examples
include reading bad handwriting or picking out the thread of
conversation in noisy cocktail party chatter.

Sure it's possible to go badly astray if one isn't careful, but
you are asking us to throw out an extremely valuable tool of
language interpretation.

>We have no evidence that this is the case. All we KNOW is that Ramey, on
>July 8, was holding this document in his hand.

Kevin, this is like catching Ramey with a smoking gun in his
hand pumping the last bullet into the corpse and then saying
that we have no evidence that he was involved with this
particular murder.

Of course there is _plenty_ of evidence.

First of all _timing_.  He is holding the message at the very
height of the Roswell brouhaha, the very reason the photos were
taken in the first place.  It's not the next day or the next
week.  Ramey was in the midst of spinning the story for the
press.  He'd just gotten off the phone with at least one
reporter and also the Pentagon press room.

But more importantly are the WORDS that can clearly be made out in this
message (or have nearly unanimous agreement).

2nd & 3rd lines.  "....the victims [or James Easton's "remains"]
of the wreck you forwarded [or "conveyed" -- same thing] to ....
at Fort Worth, Tex.

So something [nearly everybody reads it as "victims"] of some
"wreck" were sent on to Fort Worth.  How many "wrecks" were
there in this period and how many of them had to have something
sent on to Fort Worth, whether "victims" or "remains"?

4th line.  Something relating to "the 'disc'".
6th line.  Something relating to "weather balloons."

Whatever the specific context,  how many messages did Ramey
normally handle that contained a reference to "the 'disc'" or to
"weather balloons?"  Of course, directly beneath him was the
wreckage of a weather balloon (the corpse?) which Ramey was in
the midst of passing off as the explanation for the Roswell base
"flying disc" press release.

5th line.  The word "Roswell" is probably there.  [Though RPIT
mysteriously reads this as "Magdalena"]

7th line.  Last word is "crews."

Whatever was going on, "crews" were involved and it had
something to do with "the wreck."

Unless you can come up with some other period wreck that
required shipping of something to Fort Worth, would be referred
to as a "disc," somehow involved "weather balloons" and "crews,"
and required Gen. Ramey's personal attention at the height of a
press feeding frenzy over a crashed "flying disk," I think we
can safely conclude that this message had something to do with
the Roswell incident.

David Rudiak