P a g e | 1

Analysis Report on Metal Samples from the 1947 UFO Crash on the Plains of San Augustine, New Mexico

Report Author: Steve Colbern

Samples Received: 26 July, 2009

Report Date: 14 October, 2010

P a g e | 2

Background Information Six metal samples were obtained from Mr. Chuck Wade, who stated that he and a digging crew excavated

the samples from the desert floor on the plains of San Augustine, New Mexico. This area was reportedly

the site of the July 2, 1947 crash of a small, extraterrestrial craft.

Some of Mr. Wade’s materials have been analyzed previously by light and scanning electron microscopy,

no other analytical results from these materials have been published, to date.

Analytical Procedure Six metal samples were given to the author for analysis. Digital images of the samples were taken, using

a dissecting microscope, at 8X-40X magnification. The samples were then imaged using another light

microscope, capable of much higher magnification (100X-400X).

Flakes of each sample were then removed by cutting with a surgical scalpel and mounted on aluminum

posts for scanning electron microscopy (SEM) imaging and energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) elemental

analysis, to determine the presence and distribution of elements in each sample.

SEM magnifications from <100X-15,000X were employed. EDX area scan, elemental mapping, and

point-and-shoot analyses were also employed.

Small pieces of each sample (~10 mg) each were then cut off, dissolved in nitric acid, and analyzed by

inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), to determine the concentrations of the major

component elements in each sample, along with the trace element abundances. The ICP-MS raw data was

then used to determine the relative abundances of isotopes of three elements in one of the samples.

The samples were also exposed to the field of a Neodymium-Iron-Boron (NIB) magnet to determine

whether they are ferromagnetic. A pendulum with a small lead weight attached was also passed over the

samples as a simple test for gravitational, or magnetic, fields emitted from the samples.

Analysis Results

Appearance and Physical Characteristics of Sample

The six samples (W-1-6) were all shards of a silvery sheet metal, which resembled sheet aluminum. Two

of the samples had a tan, or greenish-tan, outer coating which appeared to be a protective layer.

All of the samples, with the exceptions of W-2 and W-6, had many ridges in the material, and had a

crumpled appearance.

All of the samples were able to be bent by hand, with sample W-6 being the only exception. This sample

was thicker than the others, and its increased thickness may have accounted for its greater strength.

Light Microscopy

Light micrographs, at magnification from 8X-400X are shown below in Figures 1-6. All samples appear

to be a sheet metal which resembles aluminum. All of the samples are very thin (~0.05 mm), except for

sample #6, which is approximately 1.0 mm thick.

P a g e | 3

Samples #2, #3, and #6 had thin surface coatings, which appeared to be a few microns in thickness.

These coatings later proved to be of different composition than the bulk metals.

These coatings could be removed by scraping with a knife, or other metallic instrument, but were bonded

fairly well to the metal (Figure 2). Samples W-2 and W-6 appeared to have the thickest coatings.

Figure 1-Sample W-1-Image (a)-8X, Image (b)-20X, Image (c)-40X, Image (d)-100X, Image (e)-

200X, Image (f)-400X

P a g e | 4

The coating on sample W-2 was tan in color, the coating on sample W-3 was brown, and the coating on

sample W-6 was greenish.

Figure 2-Sample W-2-Image (a)-40X, Image (b)-40X-Showing Coating Removed, Image (c)-

100X, Image (d)-200X, Image (e)-400X, Image (f)-100X

The metallic portions of samples W-1 and W-3 appeared to have round structures, or crystals, embedded

in the metal, which were several microns in average diameter. Sample W-6, had a layered

P a g e | 5

structure, composed of what appeared to be columnar metallic crystals. The metallic portions of the

remaining samples appeared to be very uniform, under light microscopy.

Figure 3-Sample W-3- Image (a)-20X, Image (b)-40X, Image (c)-100X, Image (d)-200X, Image

(e)-400X, Image (f)-400X

P a g e | 6

Figure 4-Sample W-4- Image (a)-20X, Image (b)-40X, Image

Figure 5-Sample W-5- Image (a)-10X, Image (b)-20X, Image (c)-40X

P a g e | 7

Figure 6-Sample W-6- Image (a)-10X, Image (b)-40X, Image (c)-40X, Image-Edge (d)-100X,

Image-Coating (e)-200X-Coating, Image (f)-400X-Coating

SEM Imaging

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images were taken of all of the samples, at magnification ranging

from 25X to 15,000X. Higher magnifications were not used because a problem was encountered in

P a g e | 8

focusing on these samples at higher magnification. The focusing problem was of sufficient magnitude to

preclude the use of magnifications greater than 15,000X.

SEM images of all samples, at various magnifications, are shown in Figures 7-12.

Figure 7-Sample W-1- Image (a)-500X, Image (b)-1000X, Image (c)-2000X, Image (d)-4500X,

Image (e)-Edge-400X, Image (f)-Edge-450X

P a g e | 9

Figure 8-Sample W-2- Image (a)-27X, Image (b)-900X, Image (c)-1000X, Image (d)-1900X,

Image (e)-Edge-4000X, Image (f)-11000X

P a g e | 10

Figure 9-Sample W-3- Image (a)-1000X, Image (b)-2500X, Image (c)-5000X, Image (d)-7000X

The SEM images showed ceramic-like crystals (Figures 7-11), cracks (Figures 8 and 10), and pits (Figure

11) in the outer coatings of the coated samples, and metallic crystals in the metallic portions of the

samples, especially sample W-6, which appeared to have a preferred direction to the metallic structure

(Figure 12).

P a g e | 11

Figure 10-Sample W-4- Image (a)-1500X, Image (b)-2000X, Image (c)-X, Image (d)-X, Image

(e)-Edge-X, Image (f)-X

P a g e | 12

Figure 11-Sample W-5- Image (a)-500X, Image (b)-1000X, Image (c)-1000X, Image (d)-1000X,

Image (e)-3000X, Image (f)-3700X

P a g e | 13

Figure 12-Sample W-6- Image (a)-85X, Image (b)-430X, Image (c)-550X, Image (d)-2000X,

Image (e)-2500X, Image (f)-14000X

P a g e | 14

EDX Data

Energy Dispersive X-ray (EDX) elemental analysis was performed on all six Wade samples, in the course

of obtaining the SEM images. This analysis enables detection of elements present in relatively high

amounts, and gives the relative proportions of each.

EDX elemental mapping and point-and-shoot were done on selected sample areas, in addition to the

standard EDX spectra, which are elemental abundance averages over the area imaged. EDX mapping

shows a map of the relative concentrations of the elements detected in the imaged area, while EDX point-

and-shoot displays EDX spectra at selected points of an imaged area, highlighting differences in the

composition of imaged features.

The major component of the metallic portions of all of the samples proved to be aluminum (Al). All of

the samples appeared to be composed of aluminum alloys, with varying amounts of alloying elements.

Other elements detected included beryllium (Be), carbon (C), oxygen (O), sodium (Na), magnesium

(Mg), silicon (Si), phosphorus (P), sulfur (S), chlorine (Cl), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), titanium (Ti),

iron (Fe), and palladium (Pd).

The coating layers of the coated samples were much different in composition from the metallic portions

of the samples. Aluminum was still a major component of the coatings, but was present to a lesser

degree than in the metallic portions of the samples.

The amount of oxygen in the coatings was much greater than in the metallic phase of the samples,

indicating that the aluminum was probably present as an oxide layer, rather than as free metal. The

proportions of carbon, silicon, and chlorine in the coatings were also higher than in the metal, indicating

the probable presence of metallic silicates, carbonates, and chlorides as components of the coatings.

All of the elements detected in the metallic phases were also present in the coatings. Some elements were

also present in the coatings which were not detected in the metallic phases; these included nickel (Ni), and

barium (Ba). The coatings of samples W-1 and W-6 were also quite similar to one another. The coatings

on samples W-2 and W-3 had not been analyzed by SEM/EDX as of the date of this report, but may be in

the near future.

The EDX mapping of the coating of sample W-1 indicated that the oxygen, silicon, potassium, calcium,

and carbon in the coating tend to be concentrated in particles on the surface, which appear lighter in the

SEM images (Figure 15). The EDX point-and-shoot technique confirmed this (Figure 16). The majority

of the darker coating surface appears to consist of aluminum oxide.

P a g e | 15

Figure 13-EDX of Sample W-1- Metallic Portion of Sample

Figure 14-EDX of Sample W-1- Coating of Sample

P a g e | 16

Figure 15-EDX Mapping of Sample W-1- Metallic Portion of Sample

P a g e | 17

Figure 16-EDX Point and Shoot of Sample W-1-Metallic Portion of Sample

P a g e | 18

Figure 17-EDX of Sample W-3- Metallic Portion of Sample

P a g e | 19

Figure 18-EDX of Sample W-4- Metallic Portion of Sample-No Coating

P a g e | 20

Figure 19-EDX of Sample W-5- Metallic Portion of Sample-No Coating

P a g e | 21

Figure 20-EDX of Sample W-6- Metallic Portion of Sample

Figure 21-EDX of Sample W-6- Coating Portion of Sample

P a g e | 22

Magnetic and Electrical Analysis

None of the samples were attracted to a strong Neodymium-Iron-Boron magnet, and are

therefore not ferromagnetic.

All of the samples were tested with a volt-ohmmeter, and were found to conduct electricity.

Quantitative values of sample resistivities will be determined when more of each sample is

available.

Raman Spectroscopy

Raman spectroscopy at 532 nm laser wavelength was carried out on the samples primarily to test for the

presence of carbon nanotubes, as this is a sensitive and reliable test for their presence in a material.

The presence of carbon nanotubes in the samples was suspected because of the previous detection of

carbon nanotubes in an alien implant sample, which was recently (2008) removed from the body of an

American materials scientist. Carbon nanotubes are currently being actively researched in Earthly

materials science because of their uniquely high strength-weight ratio, and electronic properties, and it

was hypothesized that much of the alien technology may utilize these materials.

The Raman data for all six samples is shown in Figures 22-24. The Raman wavenumber range which was

chosen for the analysis encompasses the range at which carbon nanotubes absorb laser radiation.

Figure 22-532 nm Raman Spectrum of all Wade Samples-Fullscale

P a g e | 23

Figure 23-532 nm Raman Spectrum of all Wade Samples-D and G Bands

Figure 24-532 nm Raman Spectrum of all Wade Samples-RBM Band

P a g e | 24

There are peaks in the spectra of all of the samples (Figures 22 and 24) which appear to be caused by the

presence of aluminum oxide (Al2O3, 110-116 cm-1

and 289-295 cm-1

), and the band structure of metallic

aluminum (Al, 522 cm-1

).

The Raman evidence for the presence of carbon nanotubes is inconclusive for samples W-2 through W-6.

Weak peaks appear in the area of 1200 cm-1

to 1600 cm-1

, which could be produced by single-walled

carbon nanotube D and G bands, but the signals are too weak to permit positive identification as such.

Sample W-1, however, does appear to have peaks that have a much higher probability of being caused by

the presence of single-walled carbon nanotube D (1381.7 cm-1

, 1448.7 cm-1

, and 1477.5 cm-1

) and G

bands (1539.6 cm-1

, 1589.9 cm-1

, and 1621.8 cm-1

, Figure 23).

ICP-MS Analysis

Pieces of all of the samples were subjected to trace element analysis by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass

Spectroscopic (ICP-MS) analysis, performed by BodyCote testing lab, in Santa Fe Springs, CA.

This analysis involves dissolving small amounts of each sample (10 mg) in a mixture of nitric and

hydrochloric acids, and passing the solution through a plasma torch. The resulting plasma, containing

ions (charged atoms) of the elements in the sample are then passed through a mass spectrometer, which

sorts the ions by charge/mass ratio.

This analysis provides sensitive, and quantitative, results on the amounts of all elements present in the

sample. Amounts of most elements below parts-per-million (ppm) levels can be detected using this

analysis.

Sixty-eight (68) elements were tested for, with fifty-six (56) elements being detected in at least one

sample. The results of the analysis, with elements tested for in alphabetical order, are shown in Table 1.

The last column in the table is the average amount of each element detected for all six samples.

The results of the analysis, with elements listed in order of average abundance in all six samples, is shown

in Table 2.

Aluminum (Al, average concentration 95.6%) was the most abundant element in all of the samples,

followed by iron (Fe, ave. 2.40%), silicon (Si, ave. 1.02%), calcium (Ca, ave. 0.41%), manganese (Mn,

ave. 0.25%), magnesium (Mg, ave. 0.22%), potassium (K, ave. 0.07%; 707 ppm), titanium (Ti, ave.

0.03%; 333 ppm), copper (Cu, ave. 0.03%; 317 ppm), phosphorus (P, ave. 0.03%; 310 ppm), zinc (Zn,

ave. 0.03%, 309 ppm), sodium (Na, 0.02; 155 ppm).

The amounts of the most abundant elements in the six samples varied widely with the specific sample,

implying differences in function. The amounts of the most abundant elements in the samples are shown

graphically in Figures 25-27.

The maximum, minimum, and average amounts of all of the elements in the samples are shown in Table 3

(See Appendix).

P a g e | 25

Table 1-ICP-MS Results for San Augustine Crash Debris Samples-All Elements Tested For

Element Sample Number

W-1 W-2 W-3 W-4 W-5 W-6 Ave.

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm)

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm)

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm)

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm)

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm)

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm)

Conc. (ppm)

Aluminum Matrix NS Matrix NS 790000

7 Matrix NS Matrix NS Matrix NS 95.6%

Antimony 0.17 0.05 0.24 0.04 ND 0.3 0.69 0.3 ND 0.3 ND 0.3 0.18

Arsenic 0.64 0.06 ND 2 1.1 0.5 2.1 0.8 1.4 0.9 ND 0.8 0.87

Barium 56 0.009 71 0.2 27 0.09 48 0.2 75 0.2 4.9 0.05 47.0

Beryllum 0.21 0.008 0.19 0.02 0.59 0.05 0.75 0.06 0.32 0.07 0.41 0.03 0.41

Bismuth 0.042 0.008 0.34 0.02 0.21 0.05 0.32 0.09 1.1 0.09 ND 0.03 0.34

Boron ND 3 7.8 2 6.4 3 14 3 11 3 ND 3 6.5

Bromine ND 20 ND 50 ND 20 ND 30 ND 30 ND 30 0

Cadmium 0.22 0.008 0.10 0.02 0.17 0.05 0.48 0.06 0.28 0.07 0.19 0.04 0.24

Calcium 840 10 18000 20 660 10 2200 40 2800 40 64 10 4094

Cerium 5.7 0.008 2.7 0.02 8.6 0.05 13 0.06 7.6 0.07 1.4 0.03 6.5

Cesium 0.57 0.008 ND 0.02 0.44 0.2 0.45 0.3 ND 0.3 ND 0.07 0.24

Chromium 15 0.3 20 0.2 17 3 20 0.4 9.2 0.5 260 0.1 56.9

Cobalt 5.3 0.01 3.6 0.02 3.2 0.005 3.6 0.007 2.5 0.07 2.0 0.04 3.4

Copper 15 0.09 730 0.6 85 0.7 100 0.3 140 0.3 830 0.2 317

Dysprosium 0.39 0.008 0.30 0.02 0.54 0.05 1.1 0.06 0.50 0.07 0.10 0.03 0.49

Erbium 0.23 0.008 0.17 0.02 0.38 0.05 0.63 0.06 0.32 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.30

Europium 0.074 0.008 0.05 0.02 0.11 0.05 0.12 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03 0.06

Gadolinium 0.50 0.008 0.34 0.02 0.81 0.05 1.5 0.06 0.88 0.07 0.12 0.03 0.69

Gallium 31 0.008 26 0.02 38 0.05 39 0.06 22 0.07 32 0.03 31

Germanium 1.0 0.05 0.33 0.08 ND 0.6 ND 0.2 ND 0.2 ND 0.04 0.22

Gold ND 0.07 ND 0.2 ND 0.06 ND 3 ND 3 3.5 0.4 0.6

Hafnium 1.3 0.008 2.2 0.02 0.52 0.05 0.69 0.06 0.60 0.07 0.58 0.03 0.98

Holmium 0.080 0.008 0.06 0.02 0.09 0.05 0.24 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03 0.08

Iodine 0.70 0.2 0.82 0.03 ND 0.1 ND 0.4 ND 0.4 ND 0.1 0.25

Iridium ND 0.008 ND 0.02 ND 0.05 ND 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03 0

Iron 7600 1 7100 10 8800 7 111000

10 5100 10 4500 0.7 24017

Lanthanum 2.4 0.04 0.77 0.2 3.9 0.2 4.9 0.9 2.9 0.9 0.73 0.03 2.6

Lead 6.7 0.05 19 0.1 9.4 0.3 17 0.4 12 0.4 11 0.1 12.5

Lithium 5.6 0.07 4.4 2 ND 7 ND 8 ND 9 ND 4 1.7

Lutetium ND 0.2 ND 0.2 ND 3 ND 2 ND 2 ND 0.8 0

Magnesium 620 3 1900 4 530 5 850 8 630 9 8800 2 2222

Manganese 120 0.03 5900 0.04 170 0.1 200 0.2 100 0.2 8800 0.03 2548

Mercury ND 0.02 0.11 0.04 ND 0.05 ND 0.8 ND 0.9 ND 0.05 0.02

Molybdenum

1.2 0.08 2.4 0.3 3.0 0.4 3.9 1 ND 1 6.9 0.7 2.9

Neodymium 1.7 0.008 0.99 0.02 2.2 0.05 4.0 0.06 2.2 0.07 0.33 0.03 1.9

P a g e | 26

Nickel 27 0.04 42 0.1 54 0.4 62 0.2 26 0.2 29 0.03 40

Niobium 1.3 0.1 ND 3 0.45 0.05 1.1 0.06 1.1 0.07 0.54 0.03 0.7

Osmium ND 0.09 ND 0.02 ND 0.2 ND 0.2 ND 0.2 ND 0.03 0

Palladium ND 0.008 ND 0.02 ND 0.05 ND 1 ND 1 ND 3 0

Phosphorus 290 10 100 40 370 70 640 20 430 20 28 10 310

Platinum ND 0.2 ND 0.6 ND 0.4 ND 0.3 ND 0.3 0.13 0.06 0.02

Potassium 1600 10 940 100 350 200 710 300 640 300 ND 80 707

Praseodymium

0.38 0.008 0.22 0.02 0.52 0.05 0.88 0.06 0.51 0.07 0.09 0.03 0.50

Rhenium ND 0.008 ND 0.02 ND 0.05 ND 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03 0

Rhodium ND 0.008 ND 0.02 ND 0.05 ND 0.1 ND 0.1 ND 0.05 0

Rubidium 7.9 0.008 1.7 0.03 2.0 0.05 3.1 0.4 2.4 0.4 0.23 0.1 2.9

Ruthenium ND 0.008 ND 0.02 ND 0.05 ND 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03 0

Samarium 0.31 0.008 0.20 0.02 0.45 0.05 0.76 0.06 0.40 0.07 0.04 0.03 0.36

Selenium 0.30 0.2 ND 1 ND 3 ND 6 ND 7 ND 3 0.05

Silicon 26000 6000 25000 10000 2800 50 3000 40 2700 50 1700 20 10200

Silver ND 0.03 ND 0.1 0.21 0.05 0.17 0.1 0.36 0.1 0.31 0.1 0.18

Sodium 560 5 270 30 ND 70 ND 200 ND 200 100 60 155

Strontium 17 0.02 66 0.1 6.6 0.1 20 0.3 51 0.3 0.50 0.07 27

Tantalum ND 0.2 ND 3 ND 0.05 ND 0.2 ND 0.2 ND 0.03 0

Tellurium ND 0.09 ND 0.1 ND 0.4 ND 4 ND 5 ND 3 0

Thallium 0.26 0.1 0.51 0.3 0.21 0.1 ND 3 ND 3 ND 0.4 0.16

Thorium 0.81 0.008 1.8 0.02 1.9 0.7 2.3 0.3 1.4 0.3 0.26 0.03 1.4

Thulium 0.036 0.008 0.03 0.02 ND 0.05 0.11 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03 0.03

Tin 1.7 0.04 2.8 0.05 1.7 0.09 2.5 0.4 3.2 0.4 9.1 0.07 3.5

Titanium 300 2 600 0.8 270 0.3 350 1 290 1 190 0.3 333

Tungsten 0.64 0.07 2.9 0.3 0.47 0.06 ND 2 ND 2 1.0 0.03 0.84

Uranium 0.83 0.008 3.3 0.02 0.75 0.05 1.2 0.06 1.0 0.07 0.53 0.03 1.3

Vanadium 86 0.2 95 0.4 79 6 99 0.9 78 0.9 89 0.5 88

Ytterbium 0.25 0.008 0.20 0.02 0.46 0.1 0.70 0.06 0.32 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.33

Yttrium 1.9 0.01 0.44 0.02 2.4 0.05 5.2 0.2 2.6 0.2 0.38 0.05 2.2

Zinc 63 0.3 160 0.4 130 2 170 4 130 5 1200 0.4 309

Zirconium 23 0.1 25 0.5 9.9 0.08 16 0.7 18 0.7 12 0.08 17

68 elements were analyzed for. 56 elements were detected in at least one sample. Elements analyzed

for and not detected in any samples: Bromine, Gold, Iridium, Lutetium, Osmium, Palladium, Rhenium,

Rhodium, Ruthenium, Tantalum, Tellurium

P a g e | 27

Table 2-Elements Detected by ICP-MS-in Order of Average Abundance

Element Sample Number

W-1 W-2 W-3 W-4 W-5 W-6

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm)

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm

Conc. (ppm)

Det. Limit (ppm

Aluminum Matrix NS Matrix NS 790000 7 Matrix NS Matrix NS Matrix NS

Iron 7600 1 7100 10 8800 7 111000 10 5100 10 4500 0.7

Silicon 26000 6000 25000 10000 2800 50 3000 40 2700 50 1700 20

Calcium 840 10 18000 20 660 10 2200 40 2800 40 64 10

Manganese 120 0.03 5900 0.04 170 0.1 200 0.2 100 0.2 8800 0.03

Magnesium 620 3 1900 4 530 5 850 8 630 9 8800 2

Potassium 1600 10 940 100 350 200 710 300 640 300 ND 80

Titanium 300 2 600 0.8 270 0.3 350 1 290 1 190 0.3

Copper 15 0.09 730 0.6 85 0.7 100 0.3 140 0.3 830 0.2

Phosphorus 290 10 100 40 370 70 640 20 430 20 28 10

Zinc 63 0.3 160 0.4 130 2 170 4 130 5 1200 0.4

Sodium 560 5 270 30 ND 70 ND 200 ND 200 100 60

Vanadium 86 0.2 95 0.4 79 6 99 0.9 78 0.9 89 0.5

Chromium 15 0.3 20 0.2 17 3 20 0.4 9.2 0.5 260 0.1

Barium 56 0.009 71 0.2 27 0.09 48 0.2 75 0.2 4.9 0.05

Nickel 27 0.04 42 0.1 54 0.4 62 0.2 26 0.2 29 0.03

Gallium 31 0.008 26 0.02 38 0.05 39 0.06 22 0.07 32 0.03

Strontium 17 0.02 66 0.1 6.6 0.1 20 0.3 51 0.3 0.50 0.07

Zirconium 23 0.1 25 0.5 9.9 0.08 16 0.7 18 0.7 12 0.08

Lead 6.7 0.05 19 0.1 9.4 0.3 17 0.4 12 0.4 11 0.1

Boron ND 3 7.8 2 6.4 3 14 3 11 3 ND 3

Cerium 5.7 0.008 2.7 0.02 8.6 0.05 13 0.06 7.6 0.07 1.4 0.03

Tin 1.7 0.04 2.8 0.05 1.7 0.09 2.5 0.4 3.2 0.4 9.1 0.07

Cobalt 5.3 0.01 3.6 0.02 3.2 0.005 3.6 0.007 2.5 0.07 2.0 0.04

Rubidium 7.9 0.008 1.7 0.03 2.0 0.05 3.1 0.4 2.4 0.4 0.23 0.1

Molybdenum 1.2 0.08 2.4 0.3 3.0 0.4 3.9 1 ND 1 6.9 0.7

Lanthanum 2.4 0.04 0.77 0.2 3.9 0.2 4.9 0.9 2.9 0.9 0.73 0.03

Yttrium 1.9 0.01 0.44 0.02 2.4 0.05 5.2 0.2 2.6 0.2 0.38 0.05

Neodymium 1.7 0.008 0.99 0.02 2.2 0.05 4.0 0.06 2.2 0.07 0.33 0.03

Lithium 5.6 0.07 4.4 2 ND 7 ND 8 ND 9 ND 4

Thorium 0.81 0.008 1.8 0.02 1.9 0.7 2.3 0.3 1.4 0.3 0.26 0.03

Uranium 0.83 0.008 3.3 0.02 0.75 0.05 1.2 0.06 1.0 0.07 0.53 0.03

Hafnium 1.3 0.008 2.2 0.02 0.52 0.05 0.69 0.06 0.60 0.07 0.58 0.03

Arsenic 0.64 0.06 ND 2 1.1 0.5 2.1 0.8 1.4 0.9 ND 0.8

Tungsten 0.64 0.07 2.9 0.3 0.47 0.06 ND 2 ND 2 1.0 0.03

Niobium 1.3 0.1 ND 3 0.45 0.05 1.1 0.06 1.1 0.07 0.54 0.03

Gadolinium 0.50 0.008 0.34 0.02 0.81 0.05 1.5 0.06 0.88 0.07 0.12 0.03

Gold ND 0.07 ND 0.2 ND 0.06 ND 3 ND 3 3.5 0.4

Praseodymium 0.38 0.008 0.22 0.02 0.52 0.05 0.88 0.06 0.51 0.07 0.09 0.03

P a g e | 28

Dysprosium 0.39 0.008 0.30 0.02 0.54 0.05 1.1 0.06 0.50 0.07 0.10 0.03

Beryllum 0.21 0.008 0.19 0.02 0.59 0.05 0.75 0.06 0.32 0.07 0.41 0.03

Samarium 0.31 0.008 0.20 0.02 0.45 0.05 0.76 0.06 0.40 0.07 0.04 0.03

Bismuth 0.042 0.008 0.34 0.02 0.21 0.05 0.32 0.09 1.1 0.09 ND 0.03

Ytterbium 0.25 0.008 0.20 0.02 0.46 0.1 0.70 0.06 0.32 0.07 0.05 0.03

Erbium 0.23 0.008 0.17 0.02 0.38 0.05 0.63 0.06 0.32 0.07 0.05 0.03

Iodine 0.70 0.2 0.82 0.03 ND 0.1 ND 0.4 ND 0.4 ND 0.1

Cadmium 0.22 0.008 0.10 0.02 0.17 0.05 0.48 0.06 0.28 0.07 0.19 0.04

Cesium 0.57 0.008 ND 0.02 0.44 0.2 0.45 0.3 ND 0.3 ND 0.07

Germanium 1.0 0.05 0.33 0.08 ND 0.6 ND 0.2 ND 0.2 ND 0.04

Silver ND 0.03 ND 0.1 0.21 0.05 0.17 0.1 0.36 0.1 0.31 0.1

Antimony 0.17 0.05 0.24 0.04 ND 0.3 0.69 0.3 ND 0.3 ND 0.3

Thallium 0.26 0.1 0.51 0.3 0.21 0.1 ND 3 ND 3 ND 0.4

Holmium 0.080 0.008 0.06 0.02 0.09 0.05 0.24 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03

Europium 0.074 0.008 0.05 0.02 0.11 0.05 0.12 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03

Selenium 0.30 0.2 ND 1 ND 3 ND 6 ND 7 ND 3

Thulium 0.036 0.008 0.03 0.02 ND 0.05 0.11 0.06 ND 0.07 ND 0.03

Platinum ND 0.2 ND 0.6 ND 0.4 ND 0.3 ND 0.3 0.13 0.06

Mercury ND 0.02 0.11 0.04 ND 0.05 ND 0.8 ND 0.9 ND 0.05

Red denotes major component elements (100%-1%), green-minor component elements (10,000 ppm-

1,000 ppm) blue-major trace elements (1,000 ppm-100 ppm), black-minor trace elements (< 100 ppm).

Figure 25-Amounts of Fe, Si, Ca, Mn, and Mg in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 29

Figure 26- Amounts of K, Ti, and Cu in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

Figure 27- Amounts of P, Zn, and Na in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm

P a g e | 30

Isotopic Analysis of Sample W-1

Antimony (Sb), copper (Cu) and nickel (Ni) were the only elements present in the samples which were

suitable to perform isotopic abundance calculations on from the raw ICP-MS data.

These elements were suitable for this analysis because there are no analytical interferences with their

isotopes from other isotopes found in the samples.

The results of the isotopic abundance calculations for sample W-1 are shown in Table 3.

These results are very unusual, and show extremely skewed isotopic ratios in the three tested elements,

relative to the normal terrestrial amounts of the isotopes in each of these elements.

Table 3-Isotopic Ratios of Suitable Elements in Sample W-1

Element Isotope Sample Isotopic

Abundance (%)

Terrestrial Isotopic

Abundance (%)

Antimony Sb121 49.58 57.36

Sb123 50.42 42.64

Copper Cu63 48.84 69.15

Cu65 51.16 30.85

Nickel Ni58 35.31 68.08

Ni60 32.41 26.23

Ni61 ND 1.14

Ni62 32.28 3.63

Other Tests Performed

Samples W-1 and W-6 were placed on a flat surface, and a pendulum, constructed from a 4 oz lead

weight tied to an 18” long piece of monofilament nylon line was passed over the samples. When the

weight passed over the samples at close range (< 2”) the weight consistently showed a noticeable

deflection away from the sample.

These results are similar to those obtained from a similar test done on all six samples by Chuck Wade at

the 2010 UFO Congress, in Laughlin, NV.

P a g e | 31

Discussion

Appearance and Physical Characteristics of Samples

The samples are composed of aluminum alloy sheet, some of which are coated with what appears to be a

protective coating. The samples had some soil attached when first received, and had clearly been buried

at one time

The corrugations on W-2, W-3, W-4, and W-5 are reminiscent of the type of bending which can occur

from sudden shock, as in an aircraft crash, although it cannot be ruled out that the samples could have

been manufactured in this form.

The samples were composed aluminum alloys, all having a low content of copper, and with unusual

alloying/trace elements, many of which were unheard of as components of aluminum alloys in 1947, and

are unlikely to have been introduced during the aluminum manufacturing process in that era.

These facts are consistent with the material being debris from the crash of an aircraft, or spacecraft at the

San Augustine desert location. If the crash did occur in 1947, the material seems inconsistent with the

materials that were commercially available at that time, and are possibly too advanced to have been

produced by the technology of that time period.

The mechanical strength of the materials is not extraordinary, however, and seems well within the normal

limits of the strength of commercially available aluminum alloys. The materials could all be bent, torn,

and cut with relative ease.

It is not known where these samples came from in the structure of the craft, however, and it is possible

that they came from interior structures, which did not require extreme mechanical strength. If this is the

case, then samples from the exterior of the craft may show much more mechanical strength and

toughness.

The layer of ceramic-like material, seen on some of the samples (W-2, W-3, and W-6) under light

microscopy, is interesting, and appears to be some type of protective layer placed over the metal. This

type of technology was probably not available in 1947.

One of the materials (sample W-6) also appeared to have a layered structure, which is not typical of

commercial aluminum alloys.

The SEM images of the materials also show surface coatings on the samples, which appear to be applied,

and are not the simple aluminum oxide surface layer which forms naturally on standard aluminum alloys.

These coatings have pits, and pores of somewhat regular composition. There are also particles on the

surface which EDX indicated have different composition from the remainder of the coating.

The layered structure of sample W-6 is also very apparent in the SEM images. This type of structure is

not seen in aluminum alloys, and is more reminiscent of the structure seem in some titanium alloys, or a

more complex material, applied in layers by chemical vapor deposition, or some similar technique.

P a g e | 32

The EDX area data confirmed that there is a coating on some of the samples, which differs

significantly in composition from that of the metallic phase, and contains many elements not

found in the metal.

EDX mapping and point-and-shoot data confirmed that the coatings are not homogeneous, and

contain particles with different elemental composition than the rest of the coating. These coating

particles contain increased amounts of oxygen, silicon, potassium, calcium, and carbon.

The large array of elements detected in the samples by the ICP-MS testing is an indication that these are

very complex aluminum alloys, which contain unusual alloying elements, and are unlike typical aircraft

aluminum alloys which were available in 1947.

The presence of relatively large amounts of iron, calcium, silicon, zinc, relative to what is usually present

in aircraft aluminum alloy, appears to indicate that the alloys may have been intended for an application

requiring good electrical conductivity, as these elements do not decrease the electrical conductivity of

aluminum as much as most other common alloying elements.

The rare earth metals may have been added to the alloy to strengthen the material, as a large amount of

research has been done in recent years on the use of these elements to strengthen aluminum alloys.

The results of the isotopic analysis of the ICP-MS results from sample W-1 indicate that the isotopic

abundances of each of the elements tested (antimony (Sb), copper (Cu), and nickel (Ni)) differed

significantly from the isotopic composition of the same elements derived from terrestrial sources.

For elements heavier than boron, differences in isotopic composition of more than approximately 1%

from the usual terrestrial isotopic abundance pattern, indicates a high probability that the material

originated from a non-terrestrial source.

All of the elements tested differed from the terrestrial abundances by much more than this. These

elements in sample W-1 therefore may not have originated on Earth. A dedicated isotopic analysis should

be done on this sample to confirm this conclusion.

The Raman data, indicating the possible presence of carbon nanotubes in sample W-1 was very

intriguing. These materials were discovered in 1991, have unique mechanical and electrical properties,

and are currently an active area of investigation in Materials Science. Carbon nanotubes are being

investigated to strengthen metals, and create embedded electronic components.

These potential uses for carbon nanotubes result raises the possibility of the samples being advanced

“smart metal” materials, containing carbon nanotube electronics. The results of the pendulum test

indicate that the tested samples may be emitting an electromagnetic, or gravitational field, which supports

this hypothesis. Gaussmeter testing should be done on these samples to investigate whether a magnetic

field is present.

P a g e | 33

Conclusions 1) These samples contain very unusual alloying elements which were not present in aluminum

alloys in 1947. If these samples are from an aircraft which crashed in that year, they are very

unusual on that basis.

2) The coatings on the samples are also unusual because conformal coatings of this type, which are

blended with the metal, and rich in silica, titania, magnesia, sulfate, phosphate, and chloride, were

almost certainly not available in 1947. The coatings on the samples are also somewhat similar to

coatings on implants removed from people claiming alien contact.

3) The carbon nanotube indications observed in the Raman spectra of the samples indicates the

possibility that the samples may be “smart metal” materials, which contain carbon nanotubes as

electronic components, or to strengthen the materials. Since the mechanical strength of these

samples was not unusual, they should be tested for unusual electrical characteristics.

4) The isotopic ratios of three elements in sample W-1 (antimony, copper, and nickel) were

extremely skewed, with respect to the terrestrial ratios for these elements, and there is therefore a

high probability that the samples came from an extraterrestrial source. These extremely skewed

isotopic results are again reminiscent of those obtained from alleged alien implants, and from an

alleged piece of the Roswell crash debris which was analyzed by the late Dr. Russell

VernonClark (see appendix).

5) The results of the pendulum test indicate that samples W-1 and W-6 may still be emitting

gravitational, or magnetic energy, which greatly increases the probability these samples are

nanotechnological “smart metals” and of probable alien origin as well.

6) Further microscopic testing should be done on these materials to determine their internal

structures. More testing should also be done to determine the existence, extent, and profile of any

gravitational, magnetic, or electric fields the samples may be emitting, and their source of energy.

P a g e | 34

Appendix

Figure 28- Amounts of V, Cr, and Ba in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 35

Figure 29- Amounts of Ni, Ga, and Sr in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

Figure 30- Amounts of Zr, Pb, and B in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 36

Figure 31- Amounts of Ce, Sn, and Co in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

Figure 32- Amounts of Rb, Mo, and La in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 37

Figure 33- Amounts of Y, Nd, and L in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

Figure 34- Amounts of Th, U, and Hf in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 38

Figure 35- Amounts of Gd, Au, and Pr in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 39

Figure 36- Amounts of As, W, and Nb in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

Figure 37- Amounts of Dy, Be, and Sm in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 40

Figure 38- Amounts of Bi, Yb, and Er in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

Figure 39- Amounts of Ge, Ag, and Sb in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 41

Figure 40- Amounts of I, Cd, and Cs in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

Figure 41- Amounts of Tl, Ho, and Eu in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 42

Figure 42- Amounts of Se, Tm, Pt, and Hg in each Sample-in parts per million (ppm)

P a g e | 43

The Artifact-Analysis by Dr. Russell VernonClark

Is this Extraterrestrial Material?

"We have determined that this material shows significant variations from the normal isotopic compositions found on the Earth and should be considered extraterrestrial in origin."

-- Dr. Russell VernonClark

On the morning of July 4, 1997, in an

auditorium in Roswell, New Mexico, hundreds

of news reporters and other interested

onlookers came together for what was billed

as a press conference on the scientific testing

of an object said to have been recovered from

the crash of a UFO near Roswell in 1947.

The main speaker, Dr. Russell VernonClark, a

chemist from the University of California at

San Diego, delivered prepared comments and

then immediately left the auditorium,

frustrating many journalists who wanted to ask

him questions. Even so, VernonClark's

announced findings undoubtedly represented

the biggest surprise of the week-long festival

called Roswell UFO Encounter 97.

Film producer Paul Davids of Los Angeles

introduced the event with background on the

Roswell incident. Television producer

Christopher Wyatt, had arranged for scientific

P a g e | 44

testing of the object.

Investigating the Artifact

The Criteria The Artifact The Testing

o ICP/MS o SIMS o ICP/OES

The Data o Nickel o Zinc o Silver o Silicon o Germanium

Conclusions

Note: Please wait until page is fully loaded before taking links.

Excerpts from the commentary follow:

"Today, we are here to make public the laboratory

test results, scientific conclusions and the chain of

evidence of what is, without a doubt, one of the most

extraordinary discoveries of our time.

"Before I begin, I would like to thank Dr. Roger Leir,

and producer Chris Wyatt. I would also like to thank

Dr. Russell VernonClark, who is with us here today,

for his patience during the lengthy testing process

and for his courage to come forward with the

findings."

"In August 1995, Dr. Leir was contacted by an

individual who claimed to have possession of what

he stated was 'pieces of debris from the 1947 Roswell

crash.' After meeting with the individual, we began

an extensive investigation into the history of the

material and statements made by the source.

P a g e | 45

Subsequently, we learned that this material had been

kept a secret for almost 50 years because of fear of

ridicule and reprisals.

"Not until after we received the preliminary

metallurgy test results did we find the source to be

credible and the material worthy of further research.

These preliminary results suggested the debris was

unique enough in composition and structure to

require our attention and further laboratory testing.

"At this time we took possession of the material.

From there, it was fragmented for safekeeping and

distributed to laboratories and scientists across the

country. Then the testing process began.

"In order for any material to be considered a genuine

extraterrestrial artifact, three main characteristics

must be satisfied. First, the testing must provide

conclusive results that the elemental composition of

the material is extraterrestrial in origin and could

not come from this world. Secondly, it must have

uniform structure. And third, the laboratory tests

must prove that the material was manufactured

and not naturally formed. That is, it must not be a

meteorite or meteorite fragment.

"This is the first time the Roswell debris has been

shown to the public. After a year and a half of

intensive research, scientists throughout the United

States have conducted a battery of laboratory tests,

which conclude the material you are now looking at

is manufactured, has structure and is extraterrestrial

in origin.

P a g e | 46

The alleged extraterrestrial artifact

"The piece of debris is approximately 1-1/2 inches

across and 5/8 inches in thickness. The frontal

surface shows a curvature on two levels and has

temperature discoloration that was caused by

exposure to extreme heat. This discoloration ranges

in color from indigo to dark green.

Close-up of artifact shows unusual coloration

"Whether or not the subject of extraterrestrial

intelligence is in your belief systems, the scientific

evidence that is about to be presented, combined with

the history of the debris, has led us to the conclusion that

something of extraterrestrial origin, whether a vehicle or

not, was in fact present in the desert outside Roswell in

July of 1947."

P a g e | 47

Dr. VernonClark's comments follow:

"Good morning. My name is Dr. Russell

VernonClark. I am a scientist currently employed by

the University of California, San Diego and I hold a

Ph.D. in chemistry.

"For the past year and a half, I have been privately

involved in the testing and analysis of the material

described to you. I am here today to present the

laboratory test results and analysis conducted, so far,

on this material by scientists throughout the United

States.

"From the tests that have been completed -- these

include Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass

Spectroscopy and Secondary Ion Mass Spectroscopy

-- we have determined that this material shows

significant variations from the normal isotopic

compositions found on the Earth and should be

considered extraterrestrial in origin. Further, using

Inductively Coupled Plasma/Optical Emission

Spectroscopy it has been determined that this

material should be considered as manufactured, as it

is not naturally occurring.

"It is well known that all matter is composed of

atoms. And atoms consist of a nucleus surrounded by

an electron cloud. All nuclei, other than the simplest

hydrogen, are made up of both protons and neutrons.

"Atoms which have the same number of protons are

all the same element, like aluminum or carbon. When

the number of protons between two or more atoms is

the same but the number of neutrons is different,

these atoms are called isotopes. For example, one

isotope of carbon has six protons and six neutrons

and is called carbon-12. Another isotope has six

protons and seven neutrons and is carbon-13.

Naturally occurring on the Earth, carbon is a mixture

of 98.9% carbon-12 and 1.1% carbon-13. This will

be true for all of the naturally occurring terrestrial

carbon.

"If a sample [of] carbon was found to be a 50%

P a g e | 48

carbon-12 and 50% carbon-13 mixture, we would have

to conclude that the sample was not naturally occurring

on the Earth.

"I personally conducted the first set of isotopic ratio

tests using Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass

Spectroscopy or ICP/MS for short. ICP/MS is useful

for determining elemental composition and isotopic

ratios for an extremely wide array of elements. In the

case of this material, the sample was dissolved in a

mixture of nitric acid and hydrofluoric acid. Then the

material was sprayed into Argon plasma, which

creates separate atomic ions.

"The ions are accelerated into a mass spectrometer

for separation and detection. You are, in effect,

counting the numbers of atomic nuclei that

correspond to a specific isotope.

"Because our time is limited today, I'll skip the

intricacies of the analysis and data and give you a

brief overview of the ICP/MS results. All of the

isotopes which I chose to analyze were present in

trace amounts. The analysis I conducted uncovered

the following isotopic anomalies. Let's begin with

nickel.

Nickel

[Note: Nickel has five stable isotopes, numbered 58, 60,

61,62 and 64. Dr. VernonClark tested for three of these

isotopes, as noted in the graphic above and the chart

below. The results do not take account of any Nickel 58 or

P a g e | 49

Nickel 64 that might have been present in the sample. Thus,

the numerical values of each isotope are expressed as

"relative ratios" rather than true percentage amounts of

each isotope in the sample. -- CNI News]

Nickel Element Natural

Artifact

Atomic Relative

Relative

Mass Ratios

Ratios

Ni 59.93 84.20

64.7

Ni 60.93 4.02

11.77

Ni 61.93 11.78

23.53

"Two of the isotopes of nickel present were masses 60

and 61. On the Earth, the natural abundance for these

two nickel isotopes is 26.1% and 1.13% respectively. This

is a ratio of about 23 to 1. In the sample tested, the ratio

was dramatically diminished to 5 to 1, a 4 fold decrease!

This is significantly different from the ratios for terrestrial

nickel.

Zinc

[Note: Zinc has five stable isotopes, numbered 64, 66, 67,

68, and 70. Dr. VernonClark tested for two of these

isotopes, as noted in the graphic above and the chart

below. The results do not take account of any Zinc 67, 68

or 70 that might have been present in the sample. Thus,

P a g e | 50

the numerical values of each isotope are expressed as

"relative ratios" rather than true percentage amounts of each

isotope in the sample. -- CNI News]

Zinc Element Natural

Artifact

Atomic Relative

Relative

Mass Ratios

Ratios

Zn 63.93 63.74

30.6

Zn 65.93 36.26

69.4

"Two of the isotopes of Zinc that were tested in this

material were masses 64 and 66. On Earth, the natural

abundance of zinc for these two isotopes is 48.6% and

27.9% respectively. That is a ratio of about 7 to 4. In the

zinc tested, this ratio was dramatically reversed as 4 to 9!

Again, this is significantly different from the terrestrial

zinc.

Silver

[Note: Silver has only two stable isotopes, both of which

were tested by Dr. VernonClark. Although labeled

"relative ratios" in the graphic above and the chart below,

the numerical values of the two silver isotopes are

equivalent to true percentage abundance in the sample. --

CNI News]

Silver Element Natural

Artifact

P a g e | 51

Atomic Relative

Relative

Mass Ratios

Ratios

Ag 106.91 51.35

33.34

Ag 108.90 48.65

66.66

"Finally there were two stable Silver isotopes present in

the material, Silver 107 and 109. The silver isotopes

found on Earth are at an approximate ratio of 1 to 1. The

silver ratio in the sample was 1 to 2. Once again this is a

significant difference from the terrestrial silver isotopes.

"Due to the size of the sample I was given to work with,

and because the test was double blinded, in that I had no

idea of the origin of the sample or its composition, I

strongly suggested that more tests be conducted to

corroborate these findings and further investigate the

elemental composition of the material.

"My original conclusions and recommendations led

to a second set of tests. Secondary Ion Mass

Spectroscopy, or SIMS, analysis was conducted by a

colleague at another major west coast research

university. With this method, a sample is bombarded

with ions and the surface has material 'sputtered'

away. This material is accelerated into a mass

spectrometer for separation and detection. Again, you

are, in effect, counting the numbers of atomic nuclei

that correspond to a specific isotope.

"This SIMS test corroborated the initial ICP/MS

findings and uncovered further isotopic anomalies

not detected in the first analysis. The sample, which

we now know to be nearly pure silicon, shows a

striking variation from natural abundance.

P a g e | 52

Silicon

Silicon Element Natural

Artifact

Atomic Percentage

Percentage

Mass Abundance

Abundance

Si 28 92.18

26.55

Si 29 4.71

43.28

Si 30 3.12

30.16

"For example, Silicon 28 is 92% abundant on the Earth. In

this sample, it is present in only 26% abundance. The

other two stable isotopes, silicon 29 and 30, are greatly

enhanced at more than 10 times their terrestrial natural

abundance.

Germanium

P a g e | 53

Germanium Element Natural

Artifact

Atomic Percentage

Percentage

Mass Abundance

Abundance

Ge 70 20.52

0.0

Ge 72 27.43

94.46

Ge 73 7.76

3.28

Ge 74 36.54

2.11

Ge 75 0.0

0.11

Ge 76 7.76

0.04

"A similar variation for Germanium was found with the

mass 72 isotope dominating in the tested sample at 94%

of the total Germanium. Natural, terrestrial origin

Germanium is only 27% abundant in this isotope."

[NOTE: Germanium 75 is radioactive with a very short

half-life. Its presence in the sample is therefore

anomalous. It may be an error in the testing process, or a

decay product of some other unstable isotope in the test

sample. -- CNI News.]

P a g e | 54

"The Inductively Coupled Plasma/Optical Emission

Spectroscopy or ICP/OES was conducted on the material

by a private laboratory in Texas. It is from these tests that

it was determined that the material was most likely

manufactured and not naturally occurring. ICP/OES is

useful for determining the elemental composition for an

extremely wide array of elements. The sample is sprayed

into argon plasma, which creates separate atomic ions.

These atoms are excited by the energy of the plasma and

emit electromagnetic radiation, or light, with wavelengths

(colors) specific for each element. This instrument cannot

differentiate between isotopes.

The composition of this material was found to be

greater than 99% silicon.

"Therefore it should be considered that this material

is both manufactured and extraterrestrial in

origin.

"Please keep in mind that despite the lengthy

discussion and technical scientific descriptions, these

are extremely precise laboratory tests. In the cases of

ICP/MS and SIMS, we are essentially looking inside

the atom at the nucleus and weighing its contents.

Simply put, these tests have far less error than, if you

will forgive the analogy, even the most sophisticated

DNA testing performed today.

"While the test results are astounding, the testing

process is ongoing. Portions of the material have

already been handed over to other members of the

scientific community and the objective analysis

continues. Currently, the raw data and conclusions

from these tests are being compiled and will be

submitted to a peer reviewed publication when the

rest of the testing is completed." [Conclusion of Dr.

VernonClark's presentation.]

NOTE: CNI News offers the foregoing

P a g e | 55

information in the interest of public awareness

and debate. In preparing this page, we have

repeatedly consulted Dr. VernonClark

regarding his data to assure accuracy in our

presentation. We will stay in constant touch

with the parties to this investigation and report

new developments as they occur.

Webmaster: D. Oszuscik - - Design: L. Lowe - -Content: M. Lindemann

This page has been served several times.