The Roswell Report: Case Closed

Read from the scan by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word.

# Conclusion

When critically examined, the claims that the U.S. Army Air Forces recovered a flying saucer and alien crew in 1947, were found to be a compilation of many verifiable events. For the most part, the descriptions collected by UFO theorists were of actual operations and tests carried out by the U.S. Air Force in the 1950s. Despite the usual unsavory accusations by UFO proponents of cover-up, conspiracy, intimidation, etc., documented research revealed that many of the activities were actually historic scientific achievements of which the Air Force is very proud. However, other descriptions are believed to be distorted references to Air Force members who were killed or injured in the line of duty. The incomplete and inaccurate intermingling of these actual events were grounded in just enough fact to weave a sensational story, but cannot withstand close scrutiny when compared to official records.

To analyze reports of alien bodies that at first appeared to be so offbeat as to not be remotely based in fact, it was necessary to evaluate a wide range of books, interviews, videos, etc., that a less objective review might have rejected out of hand. Only through an inclusive evaluation of these sources were Air Force researchers able to understand the interconnectivity of the widely separated events believed responsible for this "incident." And, in opposition to critics who believe Air Force research involving this subject is anything but objective, this research relied almost exclusively on the descriptions provided by the UFO proponents themselves. When collected and examined, the actual statements of the witnesses—not the extraterrestrial interpretations of UFO proponents—indicated that something was very wrong. When these descriptions were compared to documented Air Force activities, they were much too similar to be a coincidence. Soon, it became apparent that the witnesses or the UFO proponents who liberally interpreted their statements were either 1) confused, or 2) attempting to perpetrate a hoax, believing that no serious efforts would ever be taken to verify their stories.

In preparing this report, attempts were made not to only explain what conclusions were reached, but how they were reached. This undertaking was to try to de-mystify the research process by outlining the simple and logical research techniques that identified the underlying actual events. In regard to statements of witnesses that were clearly descriptions of Air Force activities, such as those that described anthropomorphic dummies, these could be generously viewed as situational misunderstandings or even honest mistakes.