THE SCI FI CHANNEL’S ROSWELL DIG FINDINGS FINALLY COME TO LIGHT
By Alejandro Rojas
The Examiner
June 5, 2009

Original Link

You may remember the Sci Fi channel’s documentary hosted by Bryant Gumble called The Roswell Crash: Startling New Evidence. A big part of the show is known as the Roswell Dig. Headed by University of New Mexico archeologist, Dr. Bill Doleman, Roswell researchers Don Schmidt, Tom Carey, Chuck Zukowski, and Debbie Ziegelmeier along with other volunteers went to the place they believed was the most likely site of the famous alleged UFO crash in 1947.

There are actually several possible sites, and most experts agree that the site people pay to tour is not the correct site. Sci Fi gathered some of the top Roswell experts, so there is a lot of evidence that lead them to the spot where they set up their dig, and it is still an undisclosed area that only a few insiders know about.

At the site, they put together a professional archeological dig aimed at finding debris left behind by the alleged military clean-up crews that whisked away any evidence of a crash. The show periodically caught up with the dig site workers, making you think that they would reveal a “startling” find. In the end they did find some small items that the show of course made a big deal about, but the show ended without any real analysis of the items, promising that it would be included in the next exciting episode.

Unfortunately, NBC soon bought the Sci Fi channel and canceled any further dig episodes. There was a follow up show as part of a Sci Fi series called Sci Fi investigates. Dr. Doleman and crew went back, but no analysis was presented.

So every once in awhile someone will ask me in an interview or just in passing if I know what happened to that debris and if it was ever analyzed. I have had the same question. Luckily, I work closely with Chuck Zukowski, who is a MUFON investigator in Colorado, and his sister Debbie Ziegelmeier who is a MUFON state director in Missouri. There was a book published by the Sci Fi channel called The Roswell Dig Diary and some of their notes can be found in it.

This team of sibling investigators has been keeping track of the items that were found. After the show, the items were put into storage at the University of New Mexico. The dig was actually in an area managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), so they are the official owners of them. However, there had been talk of possibly getting the materials analyzed to do another show. Just in case there was going to be another show, it was kept in storage at UNM. Finally, the idea of a show was dumped. Zukowski and Ziegelmeier then worked with Dr. Doleman to get the proper paperwork filled out to be able to get analysis done. Finally, after years in storage they were able to get the permission they had sought.

Last month Dr. Doleman, Zukowksi, and Ziegelmeier held a press conference in Roswell announcing that they were ready to pursue funding to get analysis done. Now they are working with interested parties to get the analysis completed, and I will share a sneak peek into the materials with you.

Controversy

One question did arise, and that was if what was found is worth analyzing. Some claimed that the materials were mundane and that the analysis already completed was sufficient and pointed to nothing special. In response to this Dr. Doleman wrote up a paper listing the items, what they might be, and the analysis that has been done thus far.

Among the items are: rubber from the sole of a shoe, shoe leather, unidentified fibers, clothing thread, burnt rock some with fibers on them, plastic tube, a piece of gray material that is possibly from tape or a trash bag, translucent white plastic, and some orange plastic like material. Perhaps this doesn’t sound too exciting. However, this was all in the middle of the desert where there is little to no human traffic.

Dr. Doleman wrote:

“In summary, artifacts from five different excavated study units on the Foster Ranch “debris site” warrant further study by the appropriate scientists using appropriate analytical techniques. Better identification -- and dating where possible -- is necessary to conclusively determine is any of the items could be of non-terrestrial origin. Alternatively, if the artifacts are of modern origin, knowledge of their age and origin might increase knowledge of the events of 1947 and offer invaluable insight into the site’s history.”

In his paper he argues that the site should be treated like a crime site. Further insight into what might have happened there, especially given the extraordinary claims, would be invaluable. What if the thread of the shoe rubber is military issue? What if what appears to be plastic is not?

From all of the questions I have received as to the status of this debris, there is certainly interest out there. Just for the sake of wrapping up this whole Roswell Dig saga, it would be great to hear the final word on this material, and glean whatever can be discovered. The implications of what might have happened out in the desert in 1947 truly are startling.

You can read Dr. Doleman’s full report, along with pictures of the material, here.

............

SCI FI ROSWELL DIG FINDINGS: 2002 MATERIAL SYNOPSIS
By Dr. Bill Doleman
June 3, 2009

Original Link

In the Fall of 2002 -- with funding by the SCI FI Channel -- archeologists from the University of New Mexico Office of Contract Archeology (OCA), together with technical advisors Don Schmitt and Tom Carey, volunteer excavators and a professional geophysicist conducted a scientific investigation at the reported initial Roswell impact site in search of just such evidence. The location, known as the "debris field" and "skip site" is located on federal Bureau of Land Management land within the former Foster Ranch, where, as the story goes, rancher Mac Brazel found strange metallic debris one morning in early July 1947. He subsequently took samples of the material into Roswell to the sheriff's office, thus launching one of the most interesting, if controversial, chapters in New Mexico's colorful history.

This was the first fully scientific investigation conducted at the site, and I served as principal investigator. It was performed under an Archaeological Resources Protection Act permit issued by the BLM and an official was published and submitted to the SCI FI Channel and BLM in 2003. The report was reproduced in full in The Roswell Dig Diaries <http://bit.ly/CJz4M>  (published by Pocket Books, a Division of Simon and Schuster) in 2004. The site was revisited briefly in 2006 -- again with SCI FI Channel funding as part of the series SCI FI Investigates -- at which time excavations focused on the area of a possible subsurface anomaly that had been discovered in a backhoe trench in 2002. The time allotted (two days), as well as the shooting schedule, severely restricted the amount of digging that got done, and a backhoe was used to clear the area with the goal of discovering further evidence of the anomaly, but none was found. Additional geophysical research was also done and a report is in preparation.

In addition, there was reportedly an earlier, unofficial investigation using archeological methods and sponsored by MUFON that took place in the late 1980s. No known report of this activity was ever prepared. The 2002 testing project did discover what could be small, shallow test pit remnants whose degree of weathering suggests they’ve been around for a number of years, however. Given ongoing controversy about the actual physical location of the debris field, it was suggested in the report that these features serve as evidence that the investigation at least took place in the same locale others had studied in the past -- in particular the MUFON “dig.”

Post-field analyses of artifacts and soils samples from the site remain largely unpublished and incomplete to this day, however, largely because funding ran out. The SCI FI Channel funded X-Ray diffraction analysis of soil samples from key locations on the site, ICPMS analysis (inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry) of soil samples from on- and off-site, as well as preliminary laboratory identification of six of the apparently non-natural artifacts recovered during the excavation project. These artifacts were part of some 20 excavated items collected by the volunteer excavators under the rubric HMUO, an acronym for “historic materials of uncertain origin.” The HMUO designation was intended to offer excavators an unbiased way to identify anything that might be a non-natural product of the events of 1947.

My preliminary identification of the HMUOs in the original report divided them into three categories: (a) definitely of natural origin (including five mineral specimens and one bone), (b) unidentified but of probable organic (i.e., biological) origin, and (c) of apparent manufactured origin. The probable organic items were identified as such by biology faculty at UNM, while four of the apparently manufactured items were submitted to Assagai Laboratories in Albuquerque, NM for further identification (Roark and Biava, 2003).

A summary of the results of these analyses as well recommendations for further analysis was submitted to the SCI FI Channel and the project’s technical advisors -- Donald Schmitt and Thomas Carey -- in September, 2003, but did not lead to further funding. The table below is drawn from my report and presents the results of my preliminary identifications for the non-natural artifacts and two apparently burned rocks of non-local origin, together with my recommendations for further analysis. The Assagai Lab identifications have been added in blue for the four items submitted for analysis.

The Assagai report (memo to me dated August 2003) concluded thus: “In summary, all samples were found to be synthetic/plastic or cellulose, nothing that was felt to be extraterrestrial.”

Refractive index analysis of the FS 31 “orange blobs (and possibly the FS 57 item -- note mention of “optical properties”) was the only laboratory testing technique mentioned, however suggesting that all the other identifications were made the same way mine were -- that is “by eye.”

Apparently man-made items that were not submitted to Assagai Labs for analysis are the tentatively identified rubber and leather shoe parts from Study Unit 6, the white fibers from Study Unit 9, and the possible cotton thread from Study Unit 10. Also not submitted were the two non-limestone rock fragments from Study Unit 15, which are of continuing interest for three reasons: (a) they are of non-local origin, (b) they appear possibly burned, and (c) there are clumps of unidentified short, straight white fibers clinging to one surface of each of the specimens.

So, yes, with the exception of the two non-local rocks, the artifacts recovered from the site appear to be of human, 20th century manufacture, but this conclusion has not been confirmed by thorough physical and chemical analysis. Ever since 2003, I have asserted that further forensic analyses of the HMUOs should be conducted for two purposes. The first is to comprehensively confirm, if possible, that the items are in fact of terrestrial and identifiable origin. Owing to the site’s tremendous significance in the on-going controversy over UFOs, as well as its cultural importance to not only the state of New Mexico, but the world at large, identification beyond “eye-ball” evaluation is needed to confirm the items’ terrestrial origin and preclude a non-terrestrial origin.

Secondly, any manufactured items that date to the 1947 era may shed light on the events that took place at Foster Ranch at that time. If, as has been claimed, the military conducted a cleanup of the site, it is possible that some artifactual evidence of that activity, or others that took place in the crucial post-event period, may be is present at the site. For those that are determined to be manufactured, attempts should be made to both determine their specific origin and use, as well as to date them, if possible, by identifying diagnostic period-of-manufacture characteristics, or -- if appropriate -- radiocarbon dating.

In fact, the site is located essentially “in the middle of nowhere,” and hence, the presence of 20th century artifacts is somewhat surprising. Possible scenarios that might account for the presence of these artifacts fall into three categories:

1. Activities related to the event itself and the immediate post-event time frame and human activities (the crash, eyewitness visits (e.g., Brazel), military visits)

2. Activities related to UFO research conducted at the site subsequent to the Summer of 1947

3. Activities related to on-going ranching and livestock grazing

In addition to the postulated military cleanup, a distinct possibility is that some or all of the apparently man-made items were left there by visitors to the site, including the MUFON-sponsored testing that reportedly occurred in the 1980s.

Depending on how many times the location has been visited by researchers such as MUFON, Mr. Schmitt and his colleagues, or others, modern artifacts could have been introduced to the site at other times as well. Only positive identification through forensic laboratory analysis can provide knowledge concerning the age and origin of these artifacts. Given these considerations, any information concerning past visits to the site by Mr. Schmitt and others would be of great aid in better understanding the origin of 20th century artifacts recovered from the site surface excavated contexts. In particular, any information concerning the nature of the MUFON excavations, their duration, the number of individuals present, the activities conducted, and whatever items that might have been lost or discarded would be invaluable.

I have used the term "forensic" because it refers to the use of scientific methods in legal issues and courts of law -- i.e., in matter where the validity of the conclusions must be as close to 100% certainty as possible. That’s also the kind of certainty needed if proof of the Roswell event (or any such claim), as well as public acceptance is to be achieved. Forensic material analyses fall into two general categories. The first might be called specialist-based analyses in which a scientist who specializes in a particular kind of material identifies specimens, often consulting a library of representative examples. The second category might be called chemistry/physics-based. This approach involves the use of a variety of analytical technologies to determine the chemical (or elemental) composition and/or physical properties of unknown materials, and uses the resulting information to identify them. As such, chemistry/physics-based methods (of which exists a vast array) are often used in service of the overall forensic analysis.

I am suggesting that professional forensic scientists -- preferably those at a reputable forensic laboratory -- be consulted for guidance in identifying the Foster Ranch site HMUOS and in the choice of appropriate instrument analyses. The major purpose of our press conference was to publicize the need for the analyses in hopes that a forensic laboratory or funder or both would step forward. It should be noted here that attempts were made to have the HMUOs studied by both the FBI (request made through the Roswell Field Office of the BLM), and New Mexico State crime Lab (request made through the governor’s office), but that neither request was granted. Here are some thoughts relating to analysis of some of the artifacts.

As any fan of the many forensic crime dramas popular on television today is aware, shoes -- particularly their soles -- are often identifiable as to manufacturer and date. Perhaps the SU 6 shoe parts, which include apparent sole fragments, may be identifiable as to origin and time frame. Also, given its possible similarity to the “metallic debris” originally reported in 1947 by eyewitnesses, the “gray film” material from SU 17 (FS No. 58) is of particular interest, despite its apparent similarity to duct tape or trash bag material. Equally interesting is the SU 17 thread (FS 32), which appears to be dark green, a color common in US Army fatigues of the post-war era. Need I say more about the implications of finding military fatigue thread at this site?

At present, the white fibers from SU 9 remain a mystery. The material was not shown to UNM biology faculty, and it does not look much like fur of any sort. Similarly, the SU 15 rock fragments, their burned appearance, and the short white fibers remain unexplained, but of interest because of the possibility that a strong impact could have produced burning.

Dating the HMUOs is also a crucial analytical goal. In addition to forensic identification and analysis, radiocarbon (C-14) dating of certain artifacts may be possible. Hence, the SU 10 thread, the SU 9 white fibers, and the SU 6 “shoe leather” -- if they are in fact biological in origin -- may be datable.

In summary, artifacts from five different excavated study units on the Foster Ranch “debris site” warrant further study by the appropriate scientists using appropriate analytical techniques. Better identification -- and dating where possible -- is necessary to conclusively determine is any of the items could be of non-terrestrial origin. Alternatively, if the artifacts are of modern origin, knowledge of their age and origin might increase knowledge of the events of 1947 and offer invaluable insight into the site’s history.

Table and photos of HMUOs (historic materials of uncertain origin) from the Foster Ranch skip site and debris field.

............

NHNE UFOs & Extraterrestrials Resource Page