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

Home , Isotopes of nickel, Isotopes of zinc

P a g e | 1

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.

P a g e | 3

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.

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

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 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

P a g e | 5

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.

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

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 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 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 -1 -1 presence of aluminum oxide (Al2O3, 110-116 cm and 289-295 cm ), 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. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) Aluminum Matrix NS Matrix NS 79000 7 Matrix NS Matrix NS Matrix NS 95.6% 0 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 11100 10 5100 10 4500 0.7 24017 0 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 Molybdenu 1.2 0.08 2.4 0.3 3.0 0.4 3.9 1 ND 1 6.9 0.7 2.9 m 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 Praseodymi 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 um 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. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. Det. Conc. Det. (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) Limit (ppm) (ppm (ppm (ppm (ppm (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 Terrestrial Isotopic Abundance (%) 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.