[Quix]

Your guessing is off-the-wall wrong.

There was NO MYLAR involved.

It appears that a major proportion of the naysayers need some ENGLISH REFRESHER LESSONS:

I realize that the more chronic naysayers tend to have a dreadfully difficult time distinguishing between

DIFFERENT

VS

SAME

but it does make it a lot easier when some of them try.

AND, I realize that the more chronic naysayers have this THING about

OBSESSIVE: GUESSING, PRETEND "SCIENCE-"BY-PROCLAMATION, ADDICTIVE EXTRAPOLATING, ASSUMING, INFERRING . . .

However, all such don't really increase the impressiveness of their proclaimed silliness a shred.

To try again . . . MYLAR is NOT NEAR THE SAME as the thin metalic material JesseAM handled from the real Roswell UFO crash. I don't know that JesseAM wants to bother trying to articulate those differences or not, lo these 60+ years since. However, he has certainly asserted plenty publicly that there's no viable sensible comparison other than the fact that both are very thin and have some metal atoms in them.

[Las Vegas Dave]

You wrote,“There was NO MYLAR involved.”

You are 100% correct, according to DuPont, mylar was invented in the early 50’s !!

http://www2.dupont.com/Automotive/en_US/products_services/teijinFilms/mylar.html

It appears the debunkers don't do their homework..