Forums

Posted: 26-01-2007 20:45 Post subject:

Whitley Strieber seems to be talking about this case in his novel
"The Grays". He doesn't mention it by name but alludes to the
fact that the motors, that operate via mercury being propelled around
a ring at high-speeds, are difficult to maintain and are dangerous
when they malfunction. He feels the civilians witnessed a rescue of
a US government craft that was using the alien-inspired motor.

FWIW
TVgeek

Posted: 30-01-2007 16:48 Post subject:

Is that one of the mercury turbines that vimhanas use??

Posted: 31-01-2007 23:43 Post subject:

Posted: 01-02-2007 17:17 Post subject:

That doesn't make it right.

Posted: 02-02-2007 10:17 Post subject:

Sorry, that was a bit blunt and un-Fortean. If I can expand upon my thoughts a little here, I might make some sense.
If I understand the concept right, the mercury turbine concept involves a ring of fluid metal rotating very fast, so that relativistic effects such as frame-dragging come into play; it may be considered a kind of reactionless pitch drive, where a slope is created in spacetime across the vehicle and the vessel is propelled forward as if falling.

There are two things which occur to me; the pitch-drive mercury turbine concept almost certainly wouldn't work, and the Cash-Landrum witnesses seem to be describing a 'rocket' with exhaust and heat effects rather than a distortion in space-time.

Posted: 02-02-2007 17:02 Post subject:

I dont know what a mercury ring is like and I dont claim to know what a distortion in space time looks like.

Posted: 03-02-2007 00:16 Post subject:

Guys, you can speculate all you want about mercury turbines (I prefer Mercury flatheads myself) as long as you remember it is just that - speculation.

Stop and think about what we've really got here. We have an uncorroborated story that could not be proven in a court of law (even after repeated tries). No question that these people suffered physical injury, but we have only their word as to how those injuries occurred. One person contracted cancer and died a number of years later, but, again, that is a fairly common occurrence and there is no way to prove a cause-and-effect relationship.

So we're left with a high profile but nonetheless unsubstantiated anecdote. I have to wonder why we waste so much time worrying about alleged alien propulsion systems when we have yet to prove that the incident occurred as the "witnesses" said it did. Seems to me, you're searching for an answer before you even know what the question is.

Just my opinion,

S

Posted: 03-02-2007 10:45 Post subject:

A case with multipe witnesses and physical effects on both enviroment, vehicle and persons.

Your right, getting cancer afterwards proves nothing.

But it does sound like an X craft, or even possibly an earthlight being tracked (some of which do give abberant effects)

Nothing to do with the ETH...

Posted: 03-02-2007 13:35 Post subject:

Kon - I didn't say that C-L wasn't an interesting case. I just said it was unproven. Think about it - how do we know the "physical effects on both environment, vehicle and persons" were inflicted as reported? We have only human testimony. There was nothing in the nature of any of these that, in and of itself screams "anomalous". The only reason they seem anomalous to us is because someone "told" us they were anomalous.

As for the cancer, Lyle Alzado insisted that it was anabolic steroids that gave him brain cancer. The truth of the matter is that no cause and effect relationship was ever established (could have been all that cocaine, don't you think?). People are sometimes desperate to have a reason why things happen to them in life. If that reason isn't immediately forthcoming, they sometimes grasp for answers. Fact is, millions of people get cancer every year. Some know why and some never do.

Again, I think it would be extremely interesting to seek out the boy in the case. He is an adult now and can tell his own story. Wonder what he would say?

S

Posted: 07-02-2007 19:39 Post subject:

But just about everything "Fortean" is unproven witness testimony and conjecture. If it stood up in court and in the laboratory, it wouldn't be Fortean, it would be scientific dogma and available for $8.99 at WalMart. Bizarre unproveable stories and conjecture are all we've got! Enjoy it for what it is!

Posted: 07-02-2007 20:45 Post subject:

My name is Curt Collins, and for the past two years, I've been working on getting the Cash-Landrum UFO case investigation rolling again. I'm trying to pick up where James Easton left off, and follow up on some on his promising leads.

So far, I have not produced much in the way of new evidence, but have exposed some of the rumors and myths attached to the case.

I hope you'll take a look at the articles at Blue Blurry Lines
http://blueblurrylines.blogspot.com/
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-V2p-dYUC7BU/Ucsvs0mWufI/AAAAAAAADIc/lfJal2hrdrs/s144/CashLandrum_1_3.jpg
and let me know what you think.

Posted: 25-07-2013 08:35 Post subject:

Threads merged.

P_M

Posted: 25-07-2013 18:11 Post subject:

Thanks for moving my post. Glad to have it in such good company!

Looking at this case from a Fortean perspective, the initial impression of the witnesses was that it was a supernatural event (the biblical End of the World). They described the light produced as splitting open the sky and lighting the area like daylight. The craft itself was not clearly defined, and the witnesses often confused it with the light it produced.

Another weird bit is that the helicopters origin has never been identified. Even if you accept the shaky testimony of the recruited secondary witnesses, there is nothing to prove helicopters were physically there. There have been theories suggesting that the helicopters were UFOs themselves (part of some cover/defensive system, and others such as Dr. Hynek and Col. John Alexander suggest the helicopters were either holographic or mental projections.

Apparently it was seeing the helicopters that made the witnesses change their minds from thinking this was a supernatural event into a terrestrial military operation. As far as I know, the witnesses were never questioned about the shift in thinking. Was this just rationalization for something too weird for them to otherwise accept?

Posted: 25-07-2013 18:26 Post subject:

Thanks for livening this up