Did Einstein visit Roswell UFO?

[deirdre]

and repeatedly stated that she was Einstein's "pet"

if i was Einsteins "pet" i would definitely, all my life, have a photo of us together hanging on my livingroom wall. and i would have brought it to my interviews with Sheila Franklin.

I didnt listen to the tapes, but in the 1994 report i read it doesnt sound like Sheila or Len could even verify Wright even met Einstein.

 

[Miss VocalCord]

What proof is there this audio is even from 1993? There seems no publication date from before 2020 so who has verified this is really Shirley Wright and Sheila Franklin on the tape? The background noises on the tape do seem a bit unnatural to me too.

Also who is this Sheila Franklin? The photo in the article seems to be the only one found on the internet, as is the same with her name.

 

[Ravi]

Wasn't Einstein "just" a purely theoretical scientist? That alone makes me wonder how much sense it would have made to bring him to a crash site. Pure bunk.

 

[FatPhil]

Wasn't Einstein "just" a purely theoretical scientist? That alone makes me wonder how much sense it would have made to bring him to a crash site. Pure bunk.

He was also a patent clerk by trade, so would have been essential for identifying patentable technologies in the alien craft.

Penn & Teller have implied that you might get sued for defamation if you use the word "bunk", and suggested an alternative word instead...

 

[johne1618]

Do you mean "...that photographers were free to take photos and that one of them gave her a set..." is an amazingly silly detail to put in a UFO story? Or that you really believe this happened and find it amazing?
.

It does seem to make her story hard to believe. It is interesting that Anthony Bragalia fails to mention the photos on his webpage about the story. Did he not read Stringfield’s account or did he omit the photos in order to sanitize the story of too much “strangeness”? (Bragalia mentions photographers on his webpage but nothing about Wright being given any photos herself).

 

[Ravi]

He was also a patent clerk by trade, so would have been essential for identifying patentable technologies in the alien craft.

Penn & Teller have implied that you might get sued for defamation if you use the word "bunk", and suggested an alternative word instead...

Well, yes he was a clerk before he got his status. But he was not the best guy to choose for engineering questions, I am sure. If you are a professor, or very clever PhD person, this does not equal being a perfect and knowledgeable engineer. This just makes to me no sense.
I have seen and experienced it before though, the "we have a problem! Lets ask the most clever guy we can find!". And then end up with a theoretical person who has no clue about how things work in the real physical world..

 

[Bradley Johansson]

It does seem to make her story hard to believe. It is interesting that Anthony Bragalia fails to mention the photos on his webpage about the story. Did he not read Stringfield’s account or did he omit the photos in order to sanitize the story of too much “strangeness”? (Bragalia mentions photographers on his webpage but nothing about Wright being given any photos herself).

Bragalia also fails to do the most basic attempts to verify the story, and ignores all of the many red flags. Not only that, he presents all of the information as fact: Wright's claim is a "confession", she is described as Einstein's assistant, she held two PhDs, etc. The only verification he attempts is to find that there is no indisputable proof that Einstein was not at Roswell in July 1947.

Since the main focus of his website is trying to present the Project Mogul balloon train debris found near Roswell in June 1947 as a crashed flying saucer made of "memory metal", with alien pilots, perhaps he does not see a reason to question claims supportive of that conclusion. For instance, in February 2021 he claimed the US government, via a response to one of his FOIA requests, confirmed that it possesses UFO debris, and relates it to the Roswell "memory metal" idea. In this difficult episode of his podcast, John Greenewald tried to explain to Bragalia why his interpretation of the FOIA response was inaccurate, and was met with great resistance. In other words, ufoexplorations.com is not a very reliable source.