The Roswell Report: Case Closed

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 offtcial 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
thesesourceswere Air Force researchersable to understandthe interconnectivity
of the widely separatedevents 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 statementsof witnessesthat 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.
I 123